Re: Interrupt routing patch for testing

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 10:33:57PM +0100, Andrew Doran wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 11:12:19PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> 
> >  intr_allocate_slot_cpu(struct cpu_info *ci, struct pic *pic, int pin,
> >                    int *index)
> >  {
> > -   int start, slot, i;
> > +   int slot, i;
> >     struct intrsource *isp;
> >  
> > -   start = CPU_IS_PRIMARY(ci) ? NUM_LEGACY_IRQS : 0;
> > -   slot = -1;
> > +   if (pic == &i8259_pic) {
> > +           if (!CPU_IS_PRIMARY(ci))
> > +                   return EBUSY;
> 
> ENODEV is more accurate. I haven't checked the callers.

I think it just migrates up. I'll change it to ENODEV.

> FWIW, the locking in intr.c isn't very good. We'll also need to look at
> having an IPI or other mechanism like RCU's patent-free predecessor make the
> updates safe on a running system.

Yeah, I know. I'm thinking about dropping the linked list and just use a
dynamic array. If you give me something to lazily free it e.g. after a
roundtrip over all CPUs, we are done.

Joerg