Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:14:28 -0400 (EDT) | From | Zwane Mwaikambo <> | Subject | Re: Updated MSI Patches |
| |
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 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.
The main reason i have a preference for a seperate MSI handling path is so that we don't have to do the platform_irq thing in do_IRQ and we know what to expect wrt irq or vector. If platform_irq stays we should at least try and pick up on what the IA64 folks have done, But that would be even harder to get done right now.
Zwane
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |