|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just becaus
|
To: |
Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:14:40 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:15:47 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<alpine.LFD.2.00.0906181206190.4213@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<4A329CF8.4050502@xxxxxxxx> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0906181206190.4213@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b2 |
On 06/18/09 09:08, Len Brown wrote:
>> In principle, the local APIC and the I/O APIC are distinct (but related)
>> components, which can be independently present.
>>
>
> bzzzzt, but thanks for playing:-)
>
Perhaps I should have expressed that a bit more clearly: you could, if
mad, build a machine with I/O APICs and some other mechanism for
delivering the interrupts to CPUs. In practice, I doubt anyone ever
has, or ever would.
The only actual exception I know of is Xen's replacement of the physical
local APIC with a paravirtualized interrupt interface.
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
| <Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Cyrill Gorcunov
Message not available
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <=
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Nakajima, Jun
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Tian, Kevin
|
|
|
Home