Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Apr 2003 20:55:12 +0300 | From | Mika Penttilä <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.5.68 Fix IO_APIC IRQ assignment bug |
| |
yes the current code has the assumption of 1to1 mapping from vector to irq, but that's a software limitation.
--Mika
Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Mika Penttilä wrote: > > > >>Why can't we use the same vector for multiple ioapic entrys? After all, >>we are already sharing irqs, and an irq is just a cookie for a vector. >>What do you mean with "lost irq routing" ? >> >> > >Each ioredtbl can take a vector, if you assign another ioredtbl with the >same vector and different IRQ then you collide with the previous entry and >wipe it from the IDT. Also irq != vector > > Zwane > >- >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/ > > >
- 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/
| |