Re: [patch 00/47] Sparse irq rework
From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Sun Oct 10 2010 - 05:37:32 EST
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 11:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >> + /* only handle fall out from setup_IO_APIC_irqs() */
> >
> > What's the fallout ? And why are we coming here in the first place
> > when the irq is < 16 ?
>
> setup_IO_APIC_irqs only handle apic_id == 0 or apic_id > 0 but irq < 16 via acpi override.
>
> it seems IBM's system have apic_id == 1, and sci irq is using 30.
>
> so at that time add that setup_IO_APIC_irq_extra() to workaround it.
> but it seems we set that two time when irq < 16.
>
> >
> >> + if (!((apic_id > 0) && (irq > 16)))
> >> + return;
I added this into the queue, but simplified it to
if (apic_id == 0 || irq < NR_IRQS_LEGACY)
Folded in the other fix and pushed out an updated tree.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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/