Re: [RFC] Deferred interrupt handling.

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 12:23:24PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> No, it means disallowing pci devices that use shared irqs, and allowing 
>> pci devices that use non-shared irqs.
>>     
>
> Most machiens I see today have almost no chance of having PCI devices
> without shared IRQs.  This probably means any implementation will only
> work on a small set of machines with very specific setup in terms of
> which PCI slots they install cards in, and only as long as you don't
> allow any type of hotplugging of devices (or ever changing hardware at
> all).  May not be worth implementing if it has such a limited use case.
> The MSI setup on the other hand does sound like it might have potential
> for working in general.
>
>   

Looking at two random servers here and a desktop, interrupts are 
unshared except for usb.  A laptop was not so lucky.  So "no chance" is 
a bit extreme.

I agree it's far from optimal, but it is less limited than you imply.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/