From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756940Ab0CJSP0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:15:26 -0500 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:40244 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752923Ab0CJSPZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:15:25 -0500 To: Ian Campbell Cc: Yinghai Lu , "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , "x86\@kernel.org" , "linuxppc-dev\@ozlabs.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: move some interrupt arch_* functions into struct irq_chip. References: <1268218524.11737.68547.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1268218559-26784-2-git-send-email-ijc@hellion.org.uk> <86802c441003100406t70dd854fx491f0ee9a6fce62b@mail.gmail.com> <1268225473.11737.69196.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1268243447.11737.70807.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:15:20 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1268243447.11737.70807.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> (Ian Campbell's message of "Wed\, 10 Mar 2010 17\:50\:47 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=76.21.114.89;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 76.21.114.89 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org, paulus@samba.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, jeremy@goop.org, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yinghai@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on in02.mta.xmission.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ian Campbell writes: > On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:42 +0000, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> >> Ian Xen in this sense is simply not x86. irq_cfg is not acpi or >> ioapic or anything but x86 specific. It has everything to do with >> having a per cpu vector table of 256 entries and architecturally >> receiving a vector number when an interrupt is fired. >> >> It totally makes sense for Xen to do something different because >> architecturally it has a completely different irq subsystem. > > OK, so that sounds like you would like the same patchset but without the > irq_cfg renaming? or potentially with renaming to x86_blah instead (I'll > rework to your preference). Currently the renaming really makes it unclear what you are doing and for some reason the description of the renaming rubbed me the wrong way. Eric