Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 08 May 2011 11:44:54 +1000 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them |
| |
On 05/07/2011 12:04 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: > I'm not really sure why these can't just be an evtchn without an > associated IRQ since it doesn't really have any interrupt-like > semantics. Perhaps just a general desire to keep event channels > abstracted into the core Xen event subsystem with IRQs as the public > facing API? Jeremy?
It doesn't really need to be an irq. The main reason was so that it would appear in /proc/interrupts so I could use the counter as a "number of times a spinlock was kicked" counter. That could be exposed in some other way if being part of the interrupt infrastructure brings too much baggage with it.
J
| |