* Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > also there might be hardware that can only route a given IRQ to a
> > subset of CPUs. While setting set_affinity allows the
> > irqbalance-daemon to 'probe' this mask, it's a far from optimal API.
>
> I agree, I am just arguing that adding another awkward interface to
> the current situation does not really make the situation better, and
> it increases our support burden.
well, please suggest a better interface then.
> For a bunch of this it is arguable that the way to go is simply to
> parse the irq type in /proc/interrupts. All of the really weird cases
> will have a distinct type there. This certainly captures the MSI-X
> case. There is still a question of how to handle the NUMA case but...
... so parsing /proc/interrupts should be that interface? That is a
historically very volatile interface. It's mostly human-parsed, and we
frequently twiddle it - genirq changed it too. In v2.6.19 we had fasteio
instead of fasteoi there.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
