Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750699AbWLMUWG (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:22:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750706AbWLMUWG (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:22:06 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:39487 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750699AbWLMUWD (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:22:03 -0500 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 21:19:44 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] Add allowed_affinity to the irq_desc to make it possible to have restricted irqs Message-ID: <20061213201944.GA3784@elte.hu> References: <1166018020.27217.805.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20061213194332.GA29185@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -5.9 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-5.9 required=5.9 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1266 Lines: 29 * Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > also there might be hardware that can only route a given IRQ to a > > subset of CPUs. While setting set_affinity allows the > > irqbalance-daemon to 'probe' this mask, it's a far from optimal API. > > I agree, I am just arguing that adding another awkward interface to > the current situation does not really make the situation better, and > it increases our support burden. well, please suggest a better interface then. > For a bunch of this it is arguable that the way to go is simply to > parse the irq type in /proc/interrupts. All of the really weird cases > will have a distinct type there. This certainly captures the MSI-X > case. There is still a question of how to handle the NUMA case but... ... so parsing /proc/interrupts should be that interface? That is a historically very volatile interface. It's mostly human-parsed, and we frequently twiddle it - genirq changed it too. In v2.6.19 we had fasteio instead of fasteoi there. Ingo - 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/