Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:59:31 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v13 |
| |
Yinghai Lu wrote: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Yinghai Lu wrote: >>> 2. make irq number is bus/devfn/idx, and every dev func will use 12bit range, irq number is relatively fixed not like current MSI irq creating is some kind of floating from NR_IRQS too. >> 2 is *STILL WRONG*, dammit! >> >> You keep bringing this one up, but our PCI addressing is >> *DOMAIN*/bus/devfn -- it falls flat on its face when you have more than >> 16 PCI domains. CAN WE PLEASE STOP WITH THIS FOOLISHNESS NOW! > > you want to u64 instead of unsigned int for irq? >
No, I think the whole notion of a static *numeric* identifier for an IRQ when it's something like MSI-X is simply pointless. I think we should assign IRQ numbers beyond the legacy range dynamically.
I really don't think anyone gives a hoot about the IRQ number for any IRQ above the 0-15 legacy range, even including the "APIC" numbers 16+.
-hpa
| |