linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/77] Re-design MSI/MSI-X interrupts enablement pattern

To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/77] Re-design MSI/MSI-X interrupts enablement pattern
From: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 11:21:09 +0200
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, "VMware, Inc." <pv-drivers@vmware.com>, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Andy King <acking@vmware.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, iss_storagedev@hp.com, linux-driver@qlogic.com, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Jon Mason <jon.mason@intel.com>, Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>, linux390@de.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
In-reply-to: <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B7371@saturn3.aculab.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cover.1380703262.git.agordeev@redhat.com> <1380840585.3419.50.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com> <20131004082920.GA4536@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B7371@saturn3.aculab.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 09:31:49AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
> > Mmmm.. I am not sure I am getting it. Could you please rephrase?
> 
> One possibility is for drivers than can use a lot of interrupts to
> request a minimum number initially and then request the additional
> ones much later on.
> That would make it less likely that none will be available for
> devices/drivers that need them but are initialised later.

It sounds as a whole new topic for me. Isn't it?

Anyway, what prevents the above from being done with pci_enable_msix(nvec1) -
pci_disable_msix() - pci_enable_msix(nvec2) where nvec1 < nvec2?

>       David

-- 
Regards,
Alexander Gordeev
agordeev@redhat.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>