On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 05:29:15PM +0100, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 05:06:31PM +0100, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > > > But would you accept patches that make the drivers test, when attaching, > > > whether the MSI interrupt actually works, and fall back to INTx > > > otherwise? This would break only for devices that blow up completely > > > when configured for MSI; I don't know if or how many of those exist. > > > > That would be better, but again, is this all really worth it? What > > benifits will MSI for usb controllers accomplish? > > On many chipsets, the onboard USB controllers all share the same > interrupt, or share their interrupts with lots of other devices. > Using MSI allows the handlers to run concurrently on different CPU > cores, and might protect other devices against interrupt storms if > a device or driver fails. But is that a failure that anyone has ever reported? I don't see the benefit of adding this and dealing with the fallout of lots of broken systems that previously were working just fine. Do you? greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
