From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Alan Mayer <ajm@sgi.com>,
jeremy@goop.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dean Nelson <dcn@sgi.com>,
Cliff Wickman <cpw@sgi.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Yinghai Lu <Yinghai.lu@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: (NEW) Dynamically allocate arch specific system vectors
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 13:10:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1hc9rmhxz.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080811195102.GL12788@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:51:02 +0200")
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:
> * Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>
>> Alan Mayer <ajm@sgi.com> writes:
>>
>> > Okay, here it is as an attachment. I think my email client is munging it.
>> > I haven't been able to fix it, apparently.
>> >
>> > I, too, would like to know what Eric thinks.
>>
>> I think arch/x86 is about to fall over from accidental complexity of
>> the irq handling. [...]
>
> it was in that state for many years already ;-) Unification, cleanups of
> other historic messes and the constant push for new hw support just made
> it stand out more visibly. IRQ and APIC code unification is definitely
> the final (and by far hardest) major step of x86 unification.
Well I think we are looking at the final couple of straws...
Yes unification (aka porting the infrastructure improvements
to x86_32) and then sharing the code is a piece of it.
>> [...] Looking at your problem and the problem of killing NR_IRQS I
>> spent way to much time playing with it this weekend then I should
>> have, but I think I have found a path that works and is fairly easily
>> verifiable.
>
> cool :-)
>
>> I have a patch series that gets me 90% of the way there, and the rest
>> appears easy but I don't have any time to mess with it right now. I
>> will try and post it something in the next couple of days.
>
> i'm very interested in it, even if it's incomplete and wont build/boot
> at all. So please consider posting your existing incomplete series as an
> RFC right now, maybe we can help finish it sooner than you will find the
> time? We can put it into a new tip/x86/irq-unification branch, without
> merging it into tip/master just yet.
Sure. Mostly I just need to allocate a few minutes to post it, later today
or tomorrow hopefully.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-11 20:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-08 15:37 [Fwd: [PATCH] x86_64: (NEW) Dynamically allocate arch specific system vectors] Alan Mayer
2008-08-11 16:59 ` [PATCH] x86_64: (NEW) Dynamically allocate arch specific system vectors Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 17:14 ` Alan Mayer
2008-08-11 19:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-11 19:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 19:55 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-11 20:10 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2008-08-11 20:02 ` Alan Mayer
2008-09-11 15:23 ` [RFC 0/4] dynamically " Dean Nelson
2008-09-11 15:25 ` [RFC 1/4] switch vector_irq[] from irq number to irq_desc pointer Dean Nelson
2008-09-11 15:27 ` [RFC 2/4] introduce dynamically allocated system vectors Dean Nelson
2008-09-14 15:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-14 15:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-11 15:28 ` [RFC 3/4] switch static system vector allocation to use vector_irq[] Dean Nelson
2008-09-11 15:29 ` [RFC 4/4] switch non-standard SYSCALL_VECTOR " Dean Nelson
2008-09-14 15:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-14 15:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-11 20:04 ` [RFC 0/4] dynamically allocate arch specific system vectors H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-12 11:46 ` Dean Nelson
2008-09-14 15:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-14 15:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-15 21:50 ` Dean Nelson
2008-09-16 8:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-16 20:46 ` Dean Nelson
2008-09-17 17:30 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-09-17 18:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-09-18 13:37 ` Dean Nelson
2008-09-18 19:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-17 19:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-17 20:21 ` Jack Steiner
2008-09-17 22:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-09-18 1:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-18 19:10 ` Jack Steiner
2008-09-19 0:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-09-19 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1hc9rmhxz.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=Yinghai.lu@amd.com \
--cc=ajm@sgi.com \
--cc=cpw@sgi.com \
--cc=dcn@sgi.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome