From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756284AbYKQE2X (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:28:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756085AbYKQE2K (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:28:10 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:41477 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755607AbYKQE2I (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:28:08 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v13 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Yinghai Lu , Andrew Morton , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, travis@sgi.com In-Reply-To: <4920C21C.2030605@zytor.com> References: <491434FB.2050904@kernel.org> <20081107124957.GA21709@elte.hu> <49168BD3.5010204@kernel.org> <20081109073813.GA17180@elte.hu> <86802c440811090003g5ac53822y852a4c1096228f8b@mail.gmail.com> <20081110094033.GL22392@elte.hu> <20081110015511.453a801e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4918065A.6050402@kernel.org> <20081110100329.GA19970@elte.hu> <491A9F87.8040403@kernel.org> <20081112120814.GG11352@elte.hu> <491C8B38.9060901@kernel.org> <20081113131850.d94fb229.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1226869137.7178.175.camel@pasglop> <4920B069.5020203@kernel.org> <4920B15E.6090200@zytor.com> <4920B2A4.4040900@kernel.org> <4920B3E3.4050707@zytor.com> <4920B911.7060504@kernel.org> <4920BA3A.5090100@zytor.com> <4920BCA8.6080600@kernel.org> <4920BF62.10700@zytor.com> <4920C19E.8090402@kernel.org> <4920C21C.2030605@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:27:45 +1100 Message-Id: <1226896066.7178.189.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 17:00 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > > so we have one list to map domain/bus/dev/func to bits [31,12] in irq ? > > > > That works, although having a more generic allocation mechanism which > isn't so tied to MSI-X would make more sense. None of that should be related to the linux interrupt number. Ben.