"Peer Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Eric, > Any decision for this patch, if not, currently we prefer to add all our > code to quirks.c.
Sorry. I think adding the code to quirks.c is fine. For bisection and code inspection purposes I would prefer the code to come as a patchset of two patches. With the generic change first. I wanted to understand where you were coming from to make certain I had not looked over something generic. The closest to generic I can make of your concern is that we are doing useless work if we know there is an upstream msi to irq mapper that we can just tunnel to over hypertransport. At the generic level we can't know that there is an upstream mapping capability as nothing reports it, so we even if it is a good idea we can't do anything. So a quirk looks fine to do what you are doing. Just please next round handle the address part of the msi mapping capability if it is present, in the x86 part of the generic code. Just in case someone implements that. 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/