From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 23:34:56 +0000 Subject: Re: RE[PATCH]2.6.4-rc3 MSI Support for IA64 Message-Id: <16466.18720.70066.525158@napali.hpl.hp.com> List-Id: References: <200403130008.i2D08SMQ011709@snoqualmie.dp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Zwane Mwaikambo Cc: long , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com, grep@kroah.com, jgarzik@pobox.com, jun.nakajima@intel.com, tom.l.nguyen@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com >>>>> On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:26:39 -0500 (EST), Zwane Mwaikambo said: Zwane> I wonder if we could consolidate these vector allocators as Zwane> assign_irq_vector(AUTO_ASSIGN) has the same semantics as Zwane> ia64_alloc_vector() and the one for i386 is also almost the Zwane> same as its MSI ilk. Agreed. I don't see any reason why ia64_alloc_vector() and assign_irq_vector() couldn't or shouldn't be one and the same thing (and assign_irq_vector() is a fine name). Tom, if you want to send me a patch that converts the existing uses of ia64_alloc_vector() to assign_irq_vector(), I'd be happy to apply (assuming it's clean etc., as usual). --david