On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 03:59:23PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Ashok Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > "ia64" is preferred, please. Nobody knows what an IPF is.
Right!. Sorry about that. > > > Is it not possible for ia64's ->set_affinity() handler to do this deferring? > There are other places where we re-program, and its fine to call the current version of set_affinity directly, like when we are doing cpu offline and trying to force migrate irqs for ia64. Changing the default set_affinity() for ia64 would result in many changes, this still keeps the same purpose of those access functions, and differentiates the proc write cases alone without changing the meaning of those handler functions. (and a smaller patch) this would further complicate the force migrate irq's when we consider MSI interrupts as well. Since it would have its own set_affinity, and we need to hack into MSI's set affinity handler as well which would complicate things. -- Cheers, Ashok Raj - Open Source Technology Center - 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/
