> -----Original Message----- > From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:pbonz...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 7:22 PM > To: Wu, Feng; Eric Auger; eric.au...@st.com; > linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu; > k...@vger.kernel.org; christoffer.d...@linaro.org; marc.zyng...@arm.com; > alex.william...@redhat.com; avi.kiv...@gmail.com; mtosa...@redhat.com; > j...@8bytes.org; b.rey...@virtualopensystems.com > Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; patc...@linaro.org > Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/6] irq: bypass: Extend skeleton for ARM forwarding > control > > > > On 07/07/2015 13:18, Wu, Feng wrote: > > Then I still need assign prod and de-assign prod in > > irq_bypass_register_consumer/irq_bypass_unregister_consumer, Right? > > Would you please share why this is better. > > The need to store the consumer->producer link seems to be unique to > posted interrupts. It is difficult to say without seeing the PI code, > but I prefer to keep the bypass manager as small as possible.
Fine. I will follow your suggestion! Thanks, Feng > > Paolo _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
