From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [(repost) git Patch 1/1] avoid IRQ0 ioapic pin collision Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 21:13:24 +0200 Message-ID: <200604272113.24705.ak@suse.de> References: <19D0D50E9B1D0A40A9F0323DBFA04ACC023B0B9F@USRV-EXCH4.na.uis.unisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:28591 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964919AbWD0TNl (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:13:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <19D0D50E9B1D0A40A9F0323DBFA04ACC023B0B9F@USRV-EXCH4.na.uis.unisys.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Protasevich, Natalie" Cc: "Brown, Len" , sergio@sergiomb.no-ip.org, Kimball Murray , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@digeo.com, kmurray@redhat.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 27 April 2006 21:10, Protasevich, Natalie wrote: > > > > >There are probably better ways to control 224 possible IRQs by their > > >total number instead of their range, and per-cpu IDTs are the better > > >answer to the IRQ shortage altogether. But just going back > > to the way > > >it was wouldn't be right I think. > > >We were able to run 2 generations of > > >systems only because we had this compression, other big systems > > >benefited from it as well. > > > > I don't propose reverting the IRQ re-name patch and breaking > > the big iron without replacing it with something else that works. > > Len, maybe it sounds dramatic and/or extreme, but how about getting rid > of IRQs and just having GSI-vector pair. > I intuitively think that would be possible (not that I have all the > details lined up :) > And this would probably take away confusing IRQ abstraction out once and > for all? I think something like that is done in ia64. x86 users are attached to their interrupt numbers I think back from the bad old days with only 16 interrupts and interrupt sharing didn't work. We might have a revolt in the user base if /proc/interrupts didn't display them anymore @) But I guess using GSI/vector internally only would be fine. -Andi