From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] have architectures specify the number of
 PIRQs a hardware domain gets
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 14:36:59 +0000
Message-ID: <5481C30B.3020901@linaro.org>
References: <5481C67D020000780004D2D1@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1417789634.22808.66.camel@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <julien.grall@linaro.org>) id 1Xwu0I-0005sc-1k
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 14:37:06 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f181.google.com with SMTP id r20so1596571wiv.8
	for <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>;
	Fri, 05 Dec 2014 06:37:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1417789634.22808.66.camel@eu.citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@eu.citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi,

On 05/12/14 14:27, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 13:51 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>  #define nr_static_irqs NR_IRQS
>> +#define arch_hwdom_irqs(domid) NR_IRQS
> 
> FWIW gic_number_lines() is the ARM equivalent of getting the number of
> GSIs.
> 
> *BUT* we don't actually use pirqs on ARM (everything goes via the
> virtualised interrupt controller). So maybe we should be setting
> nr_pirqs to 0 on ARM. I appreciate you likely want such a patch to come
> from an ARM person, so I'm fine with you making this NR_IRQS in the
> meantime.

As we already know that PIRQ is not used on ARM, it would make sense to
use directly in this patch 0.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall