From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86, apic: use 0x20 for the IRQ_MOVE_CLEANUP_VECTOR instead of 0x1f
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:13:46 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B4BBEBA.4060403@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1263254812.2859.890.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com>
On 01/11/2010 04:06 PM, Suresh Siddha wrote:
>>
>> Yes, that's what I said. My question was to Suresh what enforces that
>> in the case of his patch, which moves the legacy range into the middle
>> of the device vectors.
>
> It's not the used_vector bitmap. That range will appear as used on all
> the cpu's and hence we won't be allocating it for anything else.
>
OK, fair enough.
> Now the question is: for non-legacy (io-apic) case, instead of reserving
> this range for all the cpu's, does it make sense to generalize like any
> other vector?
It sounds like something that we could experiment with -- after
switching an IRQ to ioapic mode, make it a movable interrupt. It
*seems* it should work, but it's scary stuff to muck with.
Eric, do you see any reason why it wouldn't work? I truly couldn't
understand your previous remark, especially the bit about "it is
dangerous to play lowest priority irq games in that range".
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-12 0:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-09 2:09 [patch] x86, apic: use 0x20 for the IRQ_MOVE_CLEANUP_VECTOR instead of 0x1f Suresh Siddha
2010-01-09 2:19 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-09 2:50 ` Yinghai Lu
2010-01-11 22:53 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-01-11 22:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-11 23:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-01-11 23:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-12 0:06 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-01-12 0:13 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-01-12 0:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-01-12 0:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-12 1:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-01-12 2:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-12 2:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-01-12 10:25 ` Alan Cox
2010-01-13 20:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-01-13 20:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-13 20:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-13 20:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-12 0:42 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-11 23:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-01-11 23:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-09 3:07 ` Yinghai Lu
2010-01-09 3:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-09 3:23 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B4BBEBA.4060403@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox