"Yinghai Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 5/18/07, Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> We can solve the problem without doing that, and keeping the same >> vector number during migration keeps x86 from scaling. > > I mean ioapic level irq couls be limited. new device could use MSI or > HT irq directly and less irq routing problem.
Possibly. It really doesn't buy us anything until most irqs are MSI which they are not yet. >> Personally I would prefer to disallow irq migration. > ? typo? > For amd platform with different hypertransport chain on different > nodes, irq migration is needed. irqs not on cpu0 are needed. irq migration is less necessary, and I periodically think we are insane for supporting it. Eric - 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/