From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add irqdevice interface + userint implementation Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2007 13:23:15 +0300 Message-ID: <4618C293.8030902@qumranet.com> References: <4614FF5C.BA47.005A.0@novell.com> <20070408095853.GA31284@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-reply-to: <20070408095853.GA31284-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> +/*---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> + * optimized bitarray object - works like bitarrays in bitops, but uses >> + * a summary field to accelerate lookups. Assumes external locking >> + *---------------------------------------------------------------------*/ >> + >> +struct bitarray { >> + unsigned long summary; /* 1 per word in pending */ >> + unsigned long pending[NR_IRQ_WORDS]; >> +}; >> + >> > This should go into a separate header, probably even in include/linux/ > It's limited to BITS_PER_LONG * BITS_PER_LONG bits (1K or 4K, depending on arch). Do you see any potential users? Making it generic would be difficult in C without preprocessor abuse. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV