From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750798AbWFGDrT (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:47:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750803AbWFGDrT (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:47:19 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:47491 "EHLO gate.crashing.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750798AbWFGDrS (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:47:18 -0400 Subject: Re: genirq From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner In-Reply-To: <20060606144242.GB29798@elte.hu> References: <20060604135011.decdc7c9.akpm@osdl.org> <20060606144242.GB29798@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 13:46:32 +1000 Message-Id: <1149651993.27572.101.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Still stabilising. It's looking more like 2.6.19 material. Needs > > more review from arch maintainers too. > > there hasnt been any real problem since the MSI one. The core bits are > rather stable. The patch-queue had positive input from the maintainers > of the two architectures with the most complex IRQ hardware (arm and > ppc*), and that's reassuring. But in any case, other architectures are > not affected at all (sans brow paperbag build bugs and typos), their > __do_IRQ() handling remains unchanged. So i'd like to see this in > 2.6.18. (there a good deal of stuff we have ontop of genirq) > > (the irqpoll discussions are unrelated to genirq - they are fixes for an > irqpoll problem that the lock validator uncovered, and naturally those > patches were ontop of genirq.) I vote for genirq inclusion in 2.6.18 too. I'm almost finishing porting powerpc over to it and so far it looks good. In addition, I'm pretty confident the patches have a very low impact (if at all) on archs that haven't been ported over (the old mecanism is still there mostly untouched). In addition, I'm doing some fairly heavy rework of some of the powerpc irq management that is based on top of the genirq port and I'd really want it in 2.6.18... Finally, we are doing some crash-work on MSI (trying to get some basic support for powerpc separate from the current unuseable drivers/pci/msi.c) so we can at least get something working in 2.6.18 and that too will be based on my work mentioned above. So as far as I'm concerned, genirq is pretty important to have in right at the beginning. Cheers, Ben.