Re: [RFC 0/4] dynamically allocate arch specific system vectors

[Eric W. Biederman]

Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@xxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 03:46:54PM -0500, Dean Nelson wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:24:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > 
>> > * Dean Nelson <dcn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > 
>> > > > while i understand the UV_BAU_MESSAGE case (TLB flushes are 
>> > > > special), why does sgi-gru and sgi-xp need to go that deep? They are 
>> > > > drivers, they should be able to make use of an ordinary irq just 
>> > > > like the other 2000 drivers we have do.
>> > > 
>> > > The sgi-gru driver needs to be able to allocate a single irq/vector 
>> > > pair for all CPUs even those that are not currently online. The sgi-xp 
>> > > driver has similar but not as stringent needs.

I need to look at these patches some more (apologies I got busy).

We can not assign a vector to all CPUS.

We don't have the fields for vector -> irq mapping for cpus that
are not-online.  So we can only assign to cpus that are online now.
And latter add the other cpus when they come online.

I have had that oops, it sucks, I don't want to go back.

Eric



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/