Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759513Ab3IDSv1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2013 14:51:27 -0400 Received: from mail-qc0-f171.google.com ([209.85.216.171]:41349 "EHLO mail-qc0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755007Ab3IDSvZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2013 14:51:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 14:51:16 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Alexander Gordeev Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Joerg Roedel , Jan Beulich , Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] AHCI: Conserve interrupts with pci_enable_msi_block_part() interface Message-ID: <20130904185116.GF26609@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <3bb1b4375655ecfde5017cc70973d078f2434d5d.1378111919.git.agordeev@redhat.com> <20130903141824.GD10522@htj.dyndns.org> <20130903161906.GC14221@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20130903182731.GA27092@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130904072256.GA8726@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20130904145559.GB25788@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130904161442.GE8726@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20130904180607.GD26609@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130904184715.GA24341@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130904184715.GA24341@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1148 Lines: 26 On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 08:47:16PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 02:06:07PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > > I don't think it's necessary / a good idea to try to support > > everything. Just following the spec would be fine. If that doesn't > > work for too many devices, maybe just do one fallback? > > Calling pci_enable_msi_block_part() in a loop may seem not that terrible > if you think of the original interface - pci_enable_msi_block(). If we > were to enable multiple MSIs using that one we still had to use it pretty > much the same way ;) I don't know. The thing is, do we even want to meddle with controllers which only accept a value which isn't the value specified in the spec or the maximum value described as supported? It's icky and we are far better of playing it safe. This has the possibility of breaking boot on many configurations. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/