On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 27/10/16 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Andre Przywara wrote:
> >> The number of LPIs on a host can be potentially huge (millions),
> >> although in practise will be mostly reasonable. So prematurely allocating
>
Hi,
On 27/10/16 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> The number of LPIs on a host can be potentially huge (millions),
>> although in practise will be mostly reasonable. So prematurely allocating
>> an array of struct irq_desc's for each LPI is not an
Hi,
On 27/10/16 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Andre Przywara wrote:
The number of LPIs on a host can be potentially huge (millions),
although in practise will be mostly reasonable. So prematurely allocating
an array of struct irq_desc's for each LPI is not an option.
On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Andre Przywara wrote:
> The number of LPIs on a host can be potentially huge (millions),
> although in practise will be mostly reasonable. So prematurely allocating
> an array of struct irq_desc's for each LPI is not an option.
> However Xen itself does not care about LPIs, as
The number of LPIs on a host can be potentially huge (millions),
although in practise will be mostly reasonable. So prematurely allocating
an array of struct irq_desc's for each LPI is not an option.
However Xen itself does not care about LPIs, as every LPI will be injected
into a guest (Dom0 for
