lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Updated MSI Patches
Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> The issue with do_MSI() approach is that it's very similar to do_IRQ(),
> and we may have maintenance issues there. However, if we make a common

I agree


> do_MSI() code, that might be worth it, and I would expect much fewer
> architecture-dependent issues there, compared to do_IRQ (the common
> do_IRQ() hasn't happened yet as far as I know).

However, we have maintenance issues in this area as well :)

If you look at each architecture's implementation of do_IRQ, you can see
each implementation is strikingly similar... except for some subtle
differences. So there are arguments both ways: creating a common
do_IRQ may add maintenance value... but also create corner-case
problems for the arch maintainers.
So, IMO, do_IRQ is one special case where copying code may be preferred
over common code.

And I also feel the same way about do_MSI(). However, I have not looked
at non-ia32 MSI implementations to know what sort of issues exist.

Jeff



-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans