Yes, we'll take a look at it. John > > Hi Kenji-san > > I believe we need this property, but I am not 100% sure, so I am > going to forward your patch to our team who maintain the IRQ code > for Altix. > > Mike, Aaron or John, would one of you have time to take a look at > this? > > Thanks, > Jes > > > Kenji Kaneshige wrote: > > Hi Jes-san, Russ-san, Christoph-san and SN platform developers, > > > > I glanced over the SN code, and I found SN platform doesn't have SN > > specific irq_to_vector() function, though it has SN specific > > local_vector_to_irq() function. I guess it was OK because maybe SN > > platform depends on irq == vector and old generic irq_to_vector() was > > just returning the same value as irq. > > > > The irq_to_vector() function, however, has been changed by vector > > domain support, and currently it can return the different value from > > irq, even when VECTOR_DOMAIN_PERCPU is not enabled. This can happen > > when an interrupt thorough I/O SAPIC is unregistered and another > > interupt is registered. So if my guess (SN platform depends on irq == > > vector) is true, something problem might happen on SN platform when > > PCI hotplugging or driver reloading. > > > > If it is true that SN platform depends on irq == vector, we need to > > implement SN specific irq_to_vector() that returns the same value as > > irq, I think. I made sample patches to implement platform specific > > irq_to_vector() as follows. Note that [PATCH 2/2] is not tested yet > > because I don't have any SN platform unfortunately. > > > > [PATCH 1/2] Add base support for platform_irq_to_vector() > > [PATCH 2/2] Implement platform_irq_to_vector() for SN > > > > Could you give me comments? > > > > Thanks, > > Kenji Kaneshige > > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|