Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migratingthem

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 05/07/2011 12:04 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I'm not really sure why these can't just be an evtchn without an
> associated IRQ since it doesn't really have any interrupt-like
> semantics. Perhaps just a general desire to keep event channels
> abstracted into the core Xen event subsystem with IRQs as the public
> facing API? Jeremy?

It doesn't really need to be an irq.  The main reason was so that it
would appear in /proc/interrupts so I could use the counter as a "number
of times a spinlock was kicked" counter.  That could be exposed in some
other way if being part of the interrupt infrastructure brings too much
baggage with it.

    J
--
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/