On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 3:01 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
quoted text
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> Please check dyn_array support for x86
>> v3: split changing to nr_irqs to small patches
>>   fix checkpatch error
>>   reorder the patch sequence to make dyn_array support go at first
>>       so could use that with arrays other than NR_IRQS
>> v4: add CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ with list to use condensed irq_desc array
>>   so could use 32 init, and init more if needed.
>>   x86 32bit: have CONFIG_HAVE_DYN_ARRAY
>>   x86 64bit: have CONFIG_HAVE_DYN_ARRAY and CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ
>>
>
> So I'm still clearly missing something about this... if we need sparse IRQs
> in the first place (which we do), what's the point of the dyn_array?

x86_64: support CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ and CONFIG_DYN_ARRAY
x86_32: support CONFIG_DYN_ARRAY

some arches could use dyn_array with probing nr_irqs and it could be
32 and much less than 224.
some could have that like 512. and those arch may not need to mess up
with sparse_irq at first point.
but still could get some flexibilty about that array size.

YH
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/