[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170222072752.GA18643@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:27:52 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
George Cherian <gcherian@...iumnetworks.com>,
George Cherian <george.cherian@...ium.com>,
David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: crypto/cavium MSI-X fixups
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 09:36:04AM -0800, David Daney wrote:
> With respect to pci_enable_msix(), what do you recommend as a replacement?
pci_alloc_irq_vectors. In fact I have a tree ready for after -rc1
that removes pci_enable_msix() entirely.
> For the crypto/cavium driver, you recommend pci_alloc_irq_vectors(), which
> works well if the required MSI-X indexes are contiguous starting at zero.
> What would be used for a device that has 184 MSI-X, but only a sparse
> subset (fewer than half) of these are required for the driver operation.
> It would waste system resources to use an API that forces us to allocate
> 184 when only 80 are required.
Currently we don't have a good API for that. I've not been through all
users of pci_enable_msix_{range,exact} yet, but so far I've only found
one user not using all vectors from 0 to some limit. Depending how many
such users we have and how they'll look I will have to look into an API
to support that use case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists