Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | RE: Updated MSI Patches | Date | Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:42:10 -0700 | From | "Nguyen, Tom L" <> |
| |
Tuesday, August 12, 2003, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote >> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI >> + /* Is this an active MSI? */ >> + if (msi_desc[j]) >> + continue; >> +#endif
>> Since the code determinces whether this entry is NULL or not, I think any >> locking for msi_desc may not be required.
>Yes but there is other code which modifies msi_desc members. i think a per >msi_desc lock is needed. You could also use a kmem_cache to allocate them, >and perhaps utilise HWCACHE_ALIGN. We will have set_affinity support for MSI in our next update release. The above code will be deleted. Utilize HWCACHE_ALIGN to allocate msi_desc is a good suggestion. Thanks!
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: >> - Change the interface name from msi_free_vectors to msix_free_vectors since >> this interface is used for MSI-X device drivers, which request for releasing >> the number of vector back to the PCI subsystem. >> - Change the function name from remove_hotplug_vectors to >> msi_remove_pci_irq_vectors to have a close match with function name >> msi_get_pci_irq_vector.
>I think the vector allocator code can all be arch specific generic, >there is no particular reason as to why it has to be MSI specific. Some IHVs suggest changing the interface names from msi_alloc_vectors/ msi_free_vectors to msix_alloc_vectors/msix_free_vectors. You have a good point of keeping these generic. Agree.
Thanks, Long
- 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) |