Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936876AbYGCHPU (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:15:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755406AbYGCG7E (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 02:59:04 -0400 Received: from E23SMTP02.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.163]:33252 "EHLO e23smtp02.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755392AbYGCGot (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 02:44:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Multiple MSI From: Michael Ellerman Reply-To: michaele@au1.ibm.com To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Cc: Matthew Wilcox , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Kenji Kaneshige , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , David Miller , Dan Williams , Martine.Silbermann@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michael Ellerman In-Reply-To: <1215060119.21182.77.camel@pasglop> References: <20080703024445.GA14894@parisc-linux.org> <1215055469.21182.70.camel@pasglop> <20080703035910.GB14894@parisc-linux.org> <1215060119.21182.77.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:44:44 +1000 Message-Id: <1215067484.17950.35.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1705 Lines: 45 On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 14:41 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 21:59 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > > This is true and worth considering carefully. Are IRQ numbers a scarce > > resource on PowerPC? They are considerably less scarce than interrupt > > vectors are on x86-64. How hard is it to make IRQ numbers an abundent > > resource? Is it simply a question of increasing NR_IRQS? > > Yes, indeed, they aren't really scarce... actually less than the > underlying HW vectors in most cases, so it isn't a big issue to add some > kind of constraint to the allocator. Not scarce, but increasing NR_IRQS makes some static arrays bigger, which is not so nice. > > By the way, would people be interested in changing the MSI-X API to get > > rid of the msix_entry array? If allocating consecutive IRQs isn't a > > problem, then we could switch the MSI-X code to use consecutive IRQs. > > It would make a lot of code simpler... It's not a pretty API to be sure. I thought drivers needed the flexibility of being able to specify non-contiguous ranges. In practice it looks like only s2io is doing anything different. cheers -- Michael Ellerman OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab email: michaele@au.ibm.com stime: ellerman@au1.ibm.com notes: Michael Ellerman/Australia/IBM phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183) We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person -- 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/