[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y3UuwHuyT0lq+zvg@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 14:41:04 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us>,
Allen Hubbe <allenbh@...il.com>,
"Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>,
Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 01/33] genirq/msi: Rearrange MSI domain flags
On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 02:58:12PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> These flags got added as necessary and have no obvious structure. For
> feature support checks and masking it's convenient to have two blocks of
> flags:
>
> 1) Flags to control the internal behaviour like allocating/freeing
> MSI descriptors. Those flags do not need any support from the
> underlying MSI parent domain. They are mostly under the control
> of the outermost domain which implements the actual MSI support.
>
> 2) Flags to expose features, e.g. PCI multi-MSI or requirements
> which can depend on a underlying domain.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> ---
> include/linux/msi.h | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists