Re: [PATCH 1/6] Rewrite MSI-HOWTO

Randy Dunlap
2009-02-24T20:54:21Z

Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Thanks for the review!
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 12:00:03PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> +A Message Signalled Interrupt is a write from the device to a special
>> Consistent spelling, please.
>
> Ah yes, I thought I'd fixed that. I'll follow the PCI spec and use one 'l'.
>
>>> +To support this, the kernel must call each interrupt handler associated
>>> +with an interrupt which leads to reduced performance for the system as
>> with an interrupt,
>
> Ack.
>
>>> +Device drivers should normally call this function once per device
>>> +during the initialization phase.
>> Consistent isation/ization (or ised/ized), please.
>
> The Shorter OED is quite amusing on this point. It lists 'Initialise' as a
> variant, but in the main definition under 'Initialize', the example it
> gives of the computer usage uses 'initialise'. I can only conclude that
> a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds ;-)
>
>>> +4.6 How to tell whether MSI/MSI-X is enabled on a device
>>> +
>>> +Using lspci -v (as root) will show some devices with "Message Signalled
>> Oh gosh, does lspci misspell it?
>
> It used to. The good news is that recent pciutils now just use MSI
> instead of spelling it out. As a bonus, the capability now fits on one
> line.
>
>>> +Interrupts" and others with "MSI-X". Each of these capabilities have an
>> Each ..................... has an
>
> You're correct.
>
>>> +'Enable' flag which will be followed with either "+" (enabled) or "-"
>>> +(disabled).
>
>
>>> +including a full lspci -v so we can add the quirks to the kernel.
>> I would say "lspci -v" ...
>
> Good idea.
>
>>> +Then, lspci -t gives the list of bridges above a device. Reading
>> "lspci -t"
>
> Likewise.
>
>>> +It is also worth checking whether the device driver supports MSIs.
>>> +
>> Unneeded ending blank line (nit).
>
> Heh. I'll take it out.
>
> May I add your reviewed-by tag?

Yes.

--
~Randy