Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> writes:- I think using create_irq is a good step. - I think all vectors are wasted in the case of Xen. - I think we want a individual irq for each xen irq source. Sparc already does a demux in similar circumstances with a queue of received MSI messages an a single cpu irq that these get demuxed from. If we don't have individual irqs per drivers it will be hard to share a source base with native drivers. - I think it would be very nice if we could get irqs allocated in request_irq instead of create_irq (and equivalents). - I think ultimately it makes sense to port the per vector code to 32bit linux. On single cpu systems the cost should be just a hair more code, but no extra data structures. We can easily restrict the irq allocation to allocating the same vector on all cpus for any old machines that prove flaky with irq migration. The code between the two architectures we kept fairly close in sync when I worked on it so a merge should not be a big deal. Trouble is I'm not finding a lot of time to work on any of this stuff lately :( Eric --
| Amit K. Arora | [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.23-rc9 and a heads-up for the 2.6.24 series.. |
| Paul Jackson | Re: cpuset-remove-sched-domain-hooks-from-cpusets |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | Re: [klibc] [patch] import socket defines |
