Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:21:37 -0800 | From | Yinghai Lu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v13 |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > 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+.
you want to change ioapic/pin to irq mapping too?
so INTx and MSI will call create_irq_nr to get one irq for 16, and following first come and first serve rule.
YH
| |