Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756548AbZCCRj5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:39:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752995AbZCCRjs (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:39:48 -0500 Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.179.29]:48133 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752404AbZCCRjr (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:39:47 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 11:39:43 -0600 From: Dimitri Sivanich To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , john stultz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6 v6] SGI RTC: add generic system interrupt Message-ID: <20090303173943.GA30012@sgi.com> References: <20090303151044.GA20016@sgi.com> <20090303151357.GA20120@sgi.com> <20090303153433.GA29454@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090303153433.GA29454@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2181 Lines: 78 On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 04:34:33PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dimitri Sivanich wrote: > > > This patch allocates a system interrupt vector for various > > platform specific uses. > > this is really ugly. > > Also, why are all these symbols exported? There's no need to > build the UV RTC driver as a module. It's either built-in or not > built-in - it's small enough. OK. > > this stuff: > > > +/* Function pointer for generic interrupt vector handling */ > > +static void (*generic_interrupt_extension)(void); > > +static char generic_show_string[28]; > > +static char generic_show_prefix[6]; > > + > > +int is_generic_interrupt_registered() > > +{ > > + if (generic_interrupt_extension) > > + return 1; > > + else > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +char *generic_interrupt_string(void) > > +{ > > + return generic_show_string; > > +} > > + > > +char *generic_interrupt_prefix(void) > > +{ > > + return generic_show_prefix; > > +} > > is SMP unsafe, etc. etc. - not something we should ever call > from a module. We just shouldnt do it in this form. What > necessiates it? I wanted a way to show specific strings when displaying irq statistics. We could show these in a more generic way I suppose. Any given platform should just be changing these once, hence the lack of need for locking. > > All we need is: > > > + /* generic IPI for platform specific use */ > > + alloc_intr_gate(GENERIC_INTERRUPT_VECTOR, generic_interrupt); > > plus one trivial callback function - and then the UV platform > uses it for its own purpose. It's not like two platforms will be > running at once so there's no locking needed, etc. Right. But still register the callback function as I have it now? > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > > +extern void generic_interrupt(void); > > +#endif > > in any case please make it symmetric across 32-bit and 64-bit - > even though UV is 64-bit only. OK. > > 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/