Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, resend] replacement for noirqdebug hack

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2 Jun 2006, at 12:01, Jan Beulich wrote:

> That stickiness is clearly undesirable to me - if you bring up a domU 
> for testing or other temporary purposes that
> makes use of an interrupt already in use elsewhere, all other users of 
> the interrupt will from there on not do proper
> accounting anymore.
It's hardly a core part of interrupt management. It'd just be disabling 
a code path that only matters for broken hardware. Now that the IOAPIC 
ACking is fixed we could arguably just disable that path completely 
again (noirqdebug). So I think all the interface changes and additions 
to shared_info are overkill because this is just enabling a 
broken-hardware workaround.
>  Further, how would you want to prevent doing the hypercall if by 
> default interrupts are non-shared
> (I hope you didn't have other intentions) and hence the (sticky) flag 
> wasn't set, yet.
We'd only execute the hypercall if the return code was IRQ_NONE.

 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel