[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Fix bind_irq_vector() destination
On 26/08/2010 10:40, "Sheng Yang" <sheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thursday 26 August 2010 17:22:29 Keir Fraser wrote: >> By the way, could an IRQ's 'domain' be given a better name in Xen? We >> already have a meaning for domain, and it makes the code very confusing! >> Can we call it cpu_affinity or cpu_binding, or something a bit more >> meaningful and distinguishable? > > Or use cpu_mask directly? Would send an separate patch if you like, for > whatever > name. :) Yes, cpu_mask would be fine. I applied your other two patches now. So send a patch against http://xenbits.xen.org/staging/xen-unstable.hg Thanks, Keir > -- > regards > Yang, Sheng > >> >> -- Keir >> >> On 26/08/2010 10:14, "Sheng Yang" <sheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> The "mask" covered all online cpus in the "domain". It should be used as >>> destination later, instead of using "domain" directly. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang <sheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> -- >>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/irq.c b/xen/arch/x86/irq.c >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/irq.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/irq.c >>> @@ -86,14 +86,14 @@ >>> >>> cpus_and(mask, domain, cpu_online_map); >>> if (cpus_empty(mask)) >>> >>> return -EINVAL; >>> >>> - if ((cfg->vector == vector) && cpus_equal(cfg->domain, domain)) >>> + if ((cfg->vector == vector) && cpus_equal(cfg->domain, mask)) >>> >>> return 0; >>> >>> if (cfg->vector != IRQ_VECTOR_UNASSIGNED) >>> >>> return -EBUSY; >>> >>> for_each_cpu_mask(cpu, mask) >>> >>> per_cpu(vector_irq, cpu)[vector] = irq; >>> >>> cfg->vector = vector; >>> >>> - cfg->domain = domain; >>> + cfg->domain = mask; >>> >>> irq_status[irq] = IRQ_USED; >>> if (IO_APIC_IRQ(irq)) >>> >>> irq_vector[irq] = vector; _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |