From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266458AbUAOEhL (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:37:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266460AbUAOEhL (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:37:11 -0500 Received: from modemcable178.89-70-69.mc.videotron.ca ([69.70.89.178]:55937 "EHLO montezuma.fsmlabs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266458AbUAOEhK (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:37:10 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:36:13 -0500 (EST) From: Zwane Mwaikambo To: "Nakajima, Jun" cc: James Cleverdon , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Chris McDermott , "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: RE: [PATCH] 2.6.1-mm2: Get irq_vector size right for generic subarch UP installer kernels In-Reply-To: <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D3720017361883D@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D3720017361883D@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Nakajima, Jun wrote: > I tend to agree. I think the confusing part is the range of the IRQs on > that machine. Assuming that irq_vector[NR_IRQ_VECTORS = 1024] requires > more entries, then the IRQs should take that range, because > IO_APCI_VECTOR(irq) is just irq_vector[irq], for example. If NR_IRQS is > still 224, how can do_IRQ() can get the correct IRQ (i.e. >= 224) ? So > in that case, the IRQ should be smaller than 224, then irq_vector[] > should be smaller. In my opinion we should be breaking after we've exceeded the maximum external vectors we can install. This will of course mean less than the number of RTEs. James have you actually managed to use the devices connected to the high (over ~224) RTEs?