Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756877AbYGKMR4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:17:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754597AbYGKMRq (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:17:46 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:47376 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754006AbYGKMRp (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:17:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 06:17:44 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, grundler@parisc-linux.org, mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net, mtk.manpages@gmail.com Subject: Re: Multiple MSI, take 3 Message-ID: <20080711121744.GT14894@parisc-linux.org> References: <20080711005719.GO14894@parisc-linux.org> <20080711102326.GR14894@parisc-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1685 Lines: 41 On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 04:34:19AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > There is one idea that seems to model this cleanly > without breaking all kinds of expectations. > > That is an irq with a very small data payload. > > In that case we wire all of the vectors up to a single > irq handler that computes the payload as: > payload = vector - base-vector. > > And then we figure out how to pass that to the handler in irqaction. > > To most of the system it is a single irq so it avoids breaking > expectations about what an irq is. > > To everything else it is a little odd, and has it's own unique > set of rules (which is good as well). OK, I'm willing to play this scenario through and see where it takes us. - The affinity now matches reality. Good. - For devices without individual masking, the masking API matches reality. Good. - For devices with individual masking, we'll want a new API. Adequate. - We'll still need to allocate an aligned block of vectors on x86-64. No change. I think rather than passing the 'vector - base_vector' integer, the request_irq_block() should pass in an array of pointers as large as nvec and irqaction passes the appropriate pointer to the handler. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- 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/