On 21.04.2013, at 12:51, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> The concept of an irqfd and interrupt routing are nothing particularly tied
>> into the IOAPIC implementation. In fact, most of the code already is
>> perfectly
>> generic.
>>
On 25.04.2013, at 09:28, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 01:20:31PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> The concept of an irqfd and interrupt routing are nothing particularly tied
>>> into the IOAPIC implementation. In fa
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 01:20:31PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > The concept of an irqfd and interrupt routing are nothing particularly tied
> > into the IOAPIC implementation. In fact, most of the code already is
> > perfectly
> >
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> The concept of an irqfd and interrupt routing are nothing particularly tied
> into the IOAPIC implementation. In fact, most of the code already is perfectly
> generic.
>
> This patch set decouples most bits of the existing irqchip a
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> The concept of an irqfd and interrupt routing are nothing particularly tied
> into the IOAPIC implementation. In fact, most of the code already is perfectly
> generic.
>
> This patch set decouples most bits of the existing irqchip a
The concept of an irqfd and interrupt routing are nothing particularly tied
into the IOAPIC implementation. In fact, most of the code already is perfectly
generic.
This patch set decouples most bits of the existing irqchip and irqfd
implementation to make it reusable for non-IOAPIC platforms, like