Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752113AbXLEIX0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 03:23:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751425AbXLEIXT (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 03:23:19 -0500 Received: from dallas.jonmasters.org ([72.29.103.172]:38655 "EHLO dallas.jonmasters.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751391AbXLEIXS (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 03:23:18 -0500 Subject: IO-APIC discrepency between x86 subarches From: Jon Masters To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain Organization: World Organi[sz]ation Of Broken Dreams Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 03:22:42 -0500 Message-Id: <1196842962.25930.16.camel@perihelion> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 (2.12.0-3.fc8) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Do-Not-Run: Yes X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 74.92.29.237 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: jonathan@jonmasters.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on dallas.jonmasters.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 708 Lines: 19 Yo, Can someone tell me what the current collective thinking is about calling io_apic_sync during interrupt masking? This has changed several times recently, and is different between x86 IA32 and x86_64. As Ingo noted a long while back, it should be fine, but consistency is a nice thing. With that in mind, I'm thinking that the shared io_apic files could do with a nice cleanup - one has inlines, the other has DO_ACTION macros that are wrapped, etc. Jon. -- 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/