Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:26:34 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v13 |
| |
Yinghai Lu wrote: >> >> 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. >
I personally don't think there is any issue with changing ioapic/pin to IRQ mapping. Other people may disagree. My opinion is that IRQ numbers 16-23 are somewhat useful when you're dealing with a single IOAPIC, but after that it's all a blur.
It would, however, be a good idea if IOAPICs had their numbers assigned at detection time, as opposed to when the interrupt is registered, thus making it a stable number for a single boot, at least. The same is probably true for MSI(-X); we could assign it a range of numbers when the device is enumerated (as opposed to when a driver is activated), but I don't know to what extent that is likely to cause more troubles than it solves.
-hpa
| |