Thread (4 messages) 4 messages, 3 authors, 2005-06-22

Re: [PATCH] various sibyte 2.6.x bugfixes

From: Andy Isaacson <hidden>
Date: 2005-06-22 23:26:07

Great minds think alike...

On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 01:48:19PM -0400, Dave Johnson wrote:
Now that I look at it more that check isn't needed at all.

zero bits wont make it past irq_affinity_write_proc() so that's not
needed.

multiple bits are valid (it's also the default) so just using the
first bit that is set should be fine.
Multiple bits are valid at the API, but the current implementation of
sb1250_set_affinity can only handle setting affinity to a single CPU, so
the test should remain.  Unless I'm missing something, which is entirely
possible.
 	/* Convert logical CPU to physical CPU */
-	cpu = cpu_logical_map(i);
+	cpu = cpu_logical_map(first_cpu(mask));
Ah, but that's not right, is it?  If I as the admin say "please bind
IRQs to CPUs 0 and 1" I'll be annoyed to have them all hitting 0.  And
with the BCM1480 it's no longer an academic question.

-andy
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help