Re: [PATCH] x86/sfi: fix ioapic gsi range

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 06/08/2010 01:59 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> 
> No.  There is no reason to loose 16 IDT entries indefinitely.  We may
> need a boot time allocation when we see we have isa irqs, to replace
> the static allocation that we have.  But for the most part we dynamically
> idt entries aka vector numbers today, and there is no reason we can't
> generalize that in the future.
> 

Well, that boot time allocation is one of the things
legacy_pic->nr_legacy_irq is used for, and it really makes sense, I
think.  I would really like to move away from a compile-time allocation,
and I still find it hard to believe it has a reason to exist.

	-hpa

--
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/