Re: [PATCH] x86/IO-APIC: refine EOI-ing of migrating level interrupts

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>]

On 15/11/11 13:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 15.11.11 at 14:19, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 15/11/11 13:14, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>      if ( ioapic_has_eoi_reg(apic) )
>>>      {
>>>          /* If vector is unknown, read it from the IO-APIC */
>>> -        if ( vector == -1 )
>>> +        if ( vector == IRQ_VECTOR_UNASSIGNED )
>> Quick style query:  I consider IRQ_VECTOR_UNASSIGNED logically different
>> from passing -1 in as a value for vector, even though they are the are
>> the same value.  Is it sensible to mix them?
> I view it quite the other way around: One should explicitly pass
> IRQ_VECTOR_UNASSIGNED when passing a literal value (which
> currently doesn't happen anyway. Primarily because passing
> desc->arch.vector or desc->arch.old_vector could happen to also
> hold this very value.
>
> Jan

Ok.

Do you want any other patches to be tested on the problem server?

-- 
Andrew Cooper - Dom0 Kernel Engineer, Citrix XenServer
T: +44 (0)1223 225 900, http://www.citrix.com