Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 5 Sep 2018 11:56:03 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] RISC-V: Make IPI triggering flexible
Message-ID: <20180905185603.GA15741@infradead.org>
References: <20180904124514.6290-1-anup@brainfault.org>
 <20180904124514.6290-2-anup@brainfault.org>
 <20180904185001.GA25119@infradead.org>
 <CAAhSdy1iPZ_Y4opsXBE0o09uzgSxV8A9YKHawFB+knXH7FFLsQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy1iPZ_Y4opsXBE0o09uzgSxV8A9YKHawFB+knXH7FFLsQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:06:24AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> It's outrageous to call IPI mechanisms using interrupt-controller as "wacky".

I call pluggable IPI whacky, and it's not outragous.  What is outragous
is your bullshit architecture astronaut patches.

There might be a nned to abstract IPI details even more in the future,
but the way to do it is either architectureally in the RISC-V privileged
spec, or in the SBI spec once we actually have one.

Having host OSes go through hoops to provide pluggable IPI
implementations is complete bullshit, and the argument that we already
have this in some architectures is not a good reason to repeat that
mistake.