WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] struct irq_desc vs. struct irq_cfg

To: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] struct irq_desc vs. struct irq_cfg
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:34:37 +0100
Delivery-date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 07:34:58 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Originally, iirc, struct irq_desc's chip_data pointer was intended to be set to
something specific to the struct hw_interrupt_type instance that's being
put into its handler pointer. Currently, however, struct irq_cfg is being
used universally (and carries data that is also intended to be available) for
all interrupt types. Wouldn't it make sense to move global data back into
struct irq_desc, or should we rather introduce a second pointer (e.g.
handler_data) in struct irq_desc to allow handler specific context to be
stored?

Thanks, Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

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