From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Grant Grundler <iod00d@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 03:04:23 +0000
Subject: Re: PCI Express
Message-Id: <20050309030423.GO5502@esmail.cup.hp.com>
List-Id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
References: <4228F250.7C5E2E3C@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <4228F250.7C5E2E3C@sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 05:29:13PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
...
> An MSI should behave like a processor sending an IPI to itself since its 
> address can be targeted at the processor's interrupt block and set to 
> generate a local interrupt.  Is that right, Tom & Grant?

Yes - that's how I understand it too.

> If this won't work for us, no biggie, we just have to abstract things a
> little more.  We could make the MSI into a platform specific cookie that
> we can store a SHub/PIC/TIO address in and other platforms can use to
> target the processor interrupt block.

Couple more options:
o add hooks for MSI quirk/fixup for *after* the MSI has been assigned
  by generic code.
  
o make sure all MSI only go to "node local" processors. I thought
  platform code has some control over the CPU EID and data portion of
  the MSI. But I haven't looked over that in a few monthes.

grant