On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 12:44 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Michael Ellerman > <mich...@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > > Defining CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ enables generic code that gets rid of the > > static irq_desc array, and replaces it with an array of pointers to > > irq_descs. > > > > It also allows node local allocation of irq_descs, however we > > currently don't have the information available to do that, so we just > > allocate them on all on node 0. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mich...@ellerman.id.au> > > Why not make sparse IRQs manditory for all platforms? Is there a > performance concern with doing so? From a maintenance perspective, > I'd rather see IRQ descs manged in one way only to keep the code > simple.
I agree on the maintenance angle. My thinking was we'd run with it optional but default y for a release or two, and if no one complains we can make it mandatory. It does make some code paths bigger, and looking up an irq_desc is going to take slightly more cycles. I don't think it's a big issue, but I thought we should try it for a while before making it mandatory. The code has only been tested on x86 and sh as far as I know. cheers ps. thanks for the review
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
