Re: [PATCH 00/42] dyn_array/nr_irqs/sparse_irq support v5

[H. Peter Anvin]

Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > >
> > So I'm still clearly missing something about this... if we need sparse IRQs
> > in the first place (which we do), what's the point of the dyn_array?
>
> x86_64: support CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ and CONFIG_DYN_ARRAY
> x86_32: support CONFIG_DYN_ARRAY
>
> some arches could use dyn_array with probing nr_irqs and it could be
> 32 and much less than 224.
> some could have that like 512. and those arch may not need to mess up
> with sparse_irq at first point.
> but still could get some flexibilty about that array size.

As an x86 maintainer, I definitely do not want x86-64 and x86-32 to 
diverge unless there is an extremely strong reason to.

Other architectures may speak for themselves, but why not just support 
sparse IRQs on x86-32 *and* -64 and skip the dyn_array variant?

	-=hpa

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/