On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 06:25:35PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > Is this cxl code allocating vectors for devices that might also be > claimed by portdrv? I assume not because that sounds like a problem. > > Ugh. I always feel like the portdrv design must be sub-optimal > because this seems so hard to do cleanly. Yes, portdrv is a mess. And I fear we really need to bite the bullet rather sooner than later to sort much of this out by lifting all the logic to the core and just keep the "drivers" around for sysfs pretence. And I think CXL is trying to run into a similar (but not quiete as bad) mess with it's overly modular approach. In either case the right thing would be to do anough early setup to find the requird number of interrupts and highest interrupt number and just request that once.
