Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755569AbYGNApO (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:45:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753916AbYGNApA (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:45:00 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:45833 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752241AbYGNAo7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:44:59 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:44:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20080713.174457.82768245.davem@davemloft.net> To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, matthew@wil.cx, 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, jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net, mtk.manpages@gmail.com Subject: Re: Multiple MSI, take 3 From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1215994659.7549.227.camel@pasglop> References: <1215989044.7549.219.camel@pasglop> <1215994659.7549.227.camel@pasglop> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1330 Lines: 29 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:17:39 +1000 > On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 16:29 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Ben. Multi-MSI is a crap hardware design. Why do you think we have > > MSI-X? > > I know and I agree. Which is why I'd rather keep the SW crap totally > local to the MSI support code and not add new concepts to the generic > IRQ API such as sub-channels, for which it's really not ready for imho. > > They -are- separate IRQs, just badly implemented. Besides, a large part > of the problem is purely due to the typical x86 implementation of them, > since for example, on most PowerPC's (and possibly other archs), they > tend to land in the PIC as normal sources, and as such benefit from all > the "features" of such interrupts like HW masking, affinity control, > etc... at the PIC level. This is how it works on sparc64 too. The x86 system designers decided to implement multi-MSI in an inconvenient way, it is not a "crap hardware design", merely some (unfortunately common) implementations of it happen to be. -- 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/