[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: don't unmask disabled irqs when migrating them

> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [mailto:jeremy@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 9:45 AM
> 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.

Perhaps we don't need an irq binding here. Just like a local APIC interrupt
source which only needs vector. Somehow the virq or vipi concept in Xen
context is similar.

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.