On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Anyway, I can drop a spinlock in (in fact I have) the ppc64 irq code for
> now but that sucks, thus we should really seriously consider having the
> lockless tree in 2.6.18 or I might have to look into doing an alternate
> implementation specifically in arch code... or find some other way of
> doing the inverse mapping there...
How many interrupts do you have to ? I would expect a simple table
lookup would be fine to get from the virtual to the real interrupt.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
