On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:27:06 +0000 Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 <b32...@freescale.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have no comments about coding and architecture. It looks fine. > > > > > > Only have a query about its use case.. > > > "Any application intended to use message interrupt requires to know > > reg_num because of struct mpic_msgr* mpic_msgr_get(unsigned int reg_num) > > API" > > > > > > It will be good to search available unit internally and provide its > > pointer. It will make application more flexible. > > > > > > > The problem is that you fundamentally cannot implement an allocator for > > MSG registers if you're going to communicate with another kernel (how > > would both kernels' allocators be synchronized?). So the message register > > allocation must be decided at design time, not run time. > > > > I agree with you.. It is true while communicating with another kernel. > But message interrupts can be used by different independent drivers within > same kernel. For eg. PCIe and Ethernet driver. > As per current design both drivers needs to be in sync before requesting any > message unit for avoiding any conflict. As these drivers are completely > independent. It is very difficult. > > Can it be possible to provide new API to take care it. Do you have a real use case in mind where these message registers (not MSIs) are used internally in this manner? Perhaps an allocator could be added in the same patchset that adds such a user. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
