On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 15:30 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:And we end up re-doing the logic that the core already provides ... for individual irqs :-) Have you seen screaming MSIs yet ? We -could- if necessary add a hook to irq_chip for that case if it really ever happens... It's a minor problem I believe. It's mostly an API issue in fact, and I'm happy to live with it rather than the other approach which sounds just ... gross. Sorry but you are reproducing locally within an IRQ what the whole IRQ is about to differenciate them in the first place. It also makes it harder to remove the "irq" argument to handlers which is something Jeff started looking into and that I quite like. We can, that's what they are. They just are IRQs with -some- restrictions on -some- platforms (mostly affinity on x86 and need to soft-mask, which are fairly minor in my book). Ben. --
| Al Boldi | Re: [ck] Re: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fair starvation free interactive cpu sched... |
| Ingo Molnar | Re: [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Amit K. Arora | [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 18/37] dccp: Support for Mandatory options |
| Denys Vlasenko | [PATCH 1/2] bnx2: factor out gzip unpacker |
