Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v13 | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:25:33 +1100 |
| |
On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 15:59 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > 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.
Yup, exactly. Which is what we do on other platforms :-)
I think there is some value in getting rid of the irq_desc static array, and to a certain extend having the ability to have irq_desc's be per-cpu allocated but I think that patch tries to mix up way too many different things, including a dubious attempt at tying the interrupt subsystem into a specific implementation choice of x86 platforms for numbering.
Linux interrupts should just be a dynamically allocated number space, with an exception for the 16 first ones (0 = illegal, 1...15 = legacy) and that should be -separate- from the actual HW number of one on a given PIC. In fact, powerpc handles multiple HW interrupt domain numbers just fine that way which is very useful for embedded platforms with funky cascaded PIC setups..
Ben.
| |