Patch looks good to me now. Thanks.
-Andi
-
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/
Patch looks good to me now. Thanks.
-Andi
-
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/
On Monday 15 August 2005 10:44 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:57:53PM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> > On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> > > > diff -pruN
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:57:53PM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> > > diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c ---
> > >
On Sunday 14 August 2005 09:35 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
[ Snip! ]
> > >
> > > Can we perhaps force such sharing early temporarily even when the
> > > table is
On Sunday 14 August 2005 09:35 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
[ Snip! ]
Can we perhaps force such sharing early temporarily even when the
table is not filled up?
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:57:53PM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c ---
On Monday 15 August 2005 10:44 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:57:53PM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, James Cleverdon wrote:
> > > +static int next_irq = 16;
> >
> > Won't this need a lock for hotplug later?
>
> That's what I thought originally, but maybe not. We initialize all RTEs
> and assign IRQs+vectors fairly early in boot, plus store the results in
> arrays.
> On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> > > diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c ---
> > > 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-07-15
>
On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> > diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c ---
> > 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-07-15 14:18:57.0
>
On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c ---
2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-07-15 14:18:57.0
-0700
On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:22 am, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c ---
2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-07-15
14:18:57.0
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, James Cleverdon wrote:
+static int next_irq = 16;
Won't this need a lock for hotplug later?
That's what I thought originally, but maybe not. We initialize all RTEs
and assign IRQs+vectors fairly early in boot, plus store the results in
arrays. Thereafter the
The attached hack to assign_irq_vector may be marginally less ugly.
However, I haven't rearranged the code like Andi wanted yet.
On Thursday 11 August 2005 02:55 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > After sleeping on it, maybe the original code can be patched
> > without having to hack
On Thursday 11 August 2005 02:55 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > After sleeping on it, maybe the original code can be patched
> > without having to hack assign_irq_vector(), etc. How about:
> >
> > --- io_apic.c 2005-08-11 10:14:33.564748923 -0700
> > +++ io_apic.c.new 2005-08-11
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > I added some of the suggestions brought forward (dynamically
> > allocated IDTs, percpu IDT) last night, all that's left is
> > MSI, which does work right now, but gets all its vectors
> > allocated on the first irq handling domain. I should
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
>
> > our systems we are just about to use up all 224 interrupts, but not
> > quiet.
> > I have to mention that as far as I know Zwane is about to
> release his
> > vector sharing mechanism, he had it implemented and working
> for i386
> >
> After sleeping on it, maybe the original code can be patched
> without having to hack assign_irq_vector(), etc. How about:
>
> --- io_apic.c 2005-08-11 10:14:33.564748923 -0700
> +++ io_apic.c.new 2005-08-11 10:15:55.412331115 -0700
> @@ -617,7 +617,7 @@ int gsi_irq_sharing(int gsi)
>
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> our systems we are just about to use up all 224 interrupts, but not
> quiet.
> I have to mention that as far as I know Zwane is about to release his
> vector sharing mechanism, he had it implemented and working for i386 (I
> tested it on ES7000
On Thursday 11 August 2005 06:15 am, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > > The only problem is here:
> > >
> > > + if (i < NR_IRQS) {
> > > + gsi_2_irq[gsi] = i;
> > > + printk(KERN_INFO "GSI %d sharing vector 0x%02X and IRQ
> > > %d\n",
> > > + gsi, vector, i);
> > The only problem is here:
> >
> > + if (i < NR_IRQS) {
> > + gsi_2_irq[gsi] = i;
> > + printk(KERN_INFO "GSI %d sharing vector 0x%02X and IRQ
> > %d\n",
> > + gsi, vector, i);
> > + return i;
> > + }
> > +
> > + i = next_irq++;
> >
The only problem is here:
+ if (i NR_IRQS) {
+ gsi_2_irq[gsi] = i;
+ printk(KERN_INFO GSI %d sharing vector 0x%02X and IRQ
%d\n,
+ gsi, vector, i);
+ return i;
+ }
+
+ i = next_irq++;
That means for any IRQ
On Thursday 11 August 2005 06:15 am, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
The only problem is here:
+ if (i NR_IRQS) {
+ gsi_2_irq[gsi] = i;
+ printk(KERN_INFO GSI %d sharing vector 0x%02X and IRQ
%d\n,
+ gsi, vector, i);
+ return i;
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
our systems we are just about to use up all 224 interrupts, but not
quiet.
I have to mention that as far as I know Zwane is about to release his
vector sharing mechanism, he had it implemented and working for i386 (I
tested it on ES7000
After sleeping on it, maybe the original code can be patched
without having to hack assign_irq_vector(), etc. How about:
--- io_apic.c 2005-08-11 10:14:33.564748923 -0700
+++ io_apic.c.new 2005-08-11 10:15:55.412331115 -0700
@@ -617,7 +617,7 @@ int gsi_irq_sharing(int gsi)
*
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
our systems we are just about to use up all 224 interrupts, but not
quiet.
I have to mention that as far as I know Zwane is about to
release his
vector sharing mechanism, he had it implemented and working
for i386
(I tested it on
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
I added some of the suggestions brought forward (dynamically
allocated IDTs, percpu IDT) last night, all that's left is
MSI, which does work right now, but gets all its vectors
allocated on the first irq handling domain. I should be done
On Thursday 11 August 2005 02:55 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
After sleeping on it, maybe the original code can be patched
without having to hack assign_irq_vector(), etc. How about:
--- io_apic.c 2005-08-11 10:14:33.564748923 -0700
+++ io_apic.c.new 2005-08-11
The attached hack to assign_irq_vector may be marginally less ugly.
However, I haven't rearranged the code like Andi wanted yet.
On Thursday 11 August 2005 02:55 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
After sleeping on it, maybe the original code can be patched
without having to hack
On Wednesday 10 August 2005 05:21 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > > int gsi_irq_sharing(int gsi)
> > > {
> > > int i, irq, vector;
> > >
> > > BUG_ON(gsi >= NR_IRQ_VECTORS);
> > >
> > > if (platform_legacy_irq(gsi)) {
> > > gsi_2_irq[gsi] = gsi;
> > >
> > int gsi_irq_sharing(int gsi)
> > {
> > int i, irq, vector;
> >
> > BUG_ON(gsi >= NR_IRQ_VECTORS);
> >
> > if (platform_legacy_irq(gsi)) {
> > gsi_2_irq[gsi] = gsi;
> > return gsi;
> > }
> >
> > if (gsi_2_irq[gsi] != 0xFF)
Comments below.
On Wednesday 10 August 2005 02:03 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> > Due to some device driver issues, I built this iteration of
> > the patch vs. 2.6.12.3.
> >
> > (Sorry about the attachment, but KMail is still word wrapping
> > inserted files.)
> >
> > Background:
> >
> >
> Due to some device driver issues, I built this iteration of
> the patch vs. 2.6.12.3.
>
> (Sorry about the attachment, but KMail is still word wrapping inserted
> files.)
>
> Background:
>
> Here's a patch that builds on Natalie Protasevich's IRQ
> compression patch and tries to work for
Due to some device driver issues, I built this iteration of
the patch vs. 2.6.12.3.
(Sorry about the attachment, but KMail is still word wrapping inserted
files.)
Background:
Here's a patch that builds on Natalie Protasevich's IRQ
compression patch and tries to work for MPS boots as
Comments below.
On Wednesday 10 August 2005 02:03 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
Due to some device driver issues, I built this iteration of
the patch vs. 2.6.12.3.
(Sorry about the attachment, but KMail is still word wrapping
inserted files.)
Background:
Here's a patch that
int gsi_irq_sharing(int gsi)
{
int i, irq, vector;
BUG_ON(gsi = NR_IRQ_VECTORS);
if (platform_legacy_irq(gsi)) {
gsi_2_irq[gsi] = gsi;
return gsi;
}
if (gsi_2_irq[gsi] != 0xFF)
return
On Wednesday 10 August 2005 05:21 pm, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
int gsi_irq_sharing(int gsi)
{
int i, irq, vector;
BUG_ON(gsi = NR_IRQ_VECTORS);
if (platform_legacy_irq(gsi)) {
gsi_2_irq[gsi] = gsi;
return gsi;
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> --- 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-07-15 14:18:57.0
> -0700
> +++ n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
Due to some device driver issues, I built this iteration of the patch
vs. 2.6.12.3.
(Sorry about the attachment, but KMail is still word wrapping inserted
files.)
Background:
Here's a patch that builds on Natalie Protasevich's IRQ compression
patch and tries to work for MPS boots as well as
Due to some device driver issues, I built this iteration of the patch
vs. 2.6.12.3.
(Sorry about the attachment, but KMail is still word wrapping inserted
files.)
Background:
Here's a patch that builds on Natalie Protasevich's IRQ compression
patch and tries to work for MPS boots as well as
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 12:05:50AM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
diff -pruN 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c
--- 2.6.12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-07-15 14:18:57.0
-0700
+++ n12.3/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c2005-08-04
42 matches
Mail list logo
