Re: [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On 10/6/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
>> commit a606d2a111cdf948da5d69eb1de5526c5c2dafef
>> Author: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
>> Date:   Fri Oct 5 22:56:05 2007 -0400
>>
>>     [netdrvr] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup
>>
>>     * nv_nic_irq_optimized() and nv_nic_irq_other() were complete duplicates
>>       of nv_nic_irq(), with the exception of one function call.  Consolidate
>>       all three into a single interrupt handler, deleting a lot of redundant
>>       code.
>>
>>     * greatly simplify irq handler locking.
>>
>>       Prior to this change, the irq handler(s) would acquire and release
>>       np->lock for each action (RX, TX, other events).
>>
>>       For the common case -- RX or TX work -- the lock is always acquired,
>>       making all successive acquire/release combinations largely redundant.
>>
>>       Acquire the lock at the beginning of the irq handler, and release it at
>>       the end of the irq handler.  This is simple, easy, and obvious.
>>
>>     * remove irq handler work loop.
>>
>>       All interesting events emanating from the irq handler either have
>>       their own work loops, or they poke a timer into action.
>>
>>       Therefore, delete the pointless master interrupt handler work loop.
>>
>>     Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
>>
>>  drivers/net/forcedeth.c |  325 +++++++++++-------------------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 248 deletions(-)
>>
> any chance to create three verion irq handlers for ioapic, msi, msi-x...?
> 
> MACRO or inline function?

MSI-X already has its own separate interrupt handlers.  MSI and INTx 
call the same interrupt handling code, like the unmodified driver goes. 
  Creating an MSI-specific irq handler would not save very much AFAICS, 
but I might be missing something.

Do you have ideas/suggestions for a different method?

	Jeff