On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 7:15 AM Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@sifive.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Sep 2018 06:34:18 PDT (-0700), Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 04:15:14PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > >> This patch is doing two things: > >> 1. Allow IRQCHIP driver to provide IPI trigger mechanism > > > > And the big questions is why do we want that? The last thing we > > want is for people to "innovate" on how they deliver IPIs. RISC-V > > has defined an SBI interface for it to hide all the details, and > > we should not try to handle systems that are not SBI compliant. > > > > Eventuall we might want to revisit the SBI to improve on shortcomings > > if there are any, but we should not allow random irqchip drivers to > > override this. > > I agree. The whole point of the SBI is to provide an interface that everyone > uses so we can the go figure out how to make this fast later. If each > platform > has their own magic IPI hooks then this will end up being a mess. > > We've got some schemes floating around to make the SBI fast (essentially an > SBI > VDSO), I'd prefer to push on that rather than adding a bunch of complexity > here.
Yes, I have already removed the IPI triggering part from this patchset. Regards, Anup