From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH 30 of 38] xen: implement io_apic_ops Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:39:06 -0800 Message-ID: <4925BCDA.3030604@goop.org> References: <20081120093506.GB6885@elte.hu> <492597B9.8070506@goop.org> <20081120192218.GF3955@elte.hu> <4925BA86.7000409@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4925BA86.7000409@kernel.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Yinghai Lu Cc: Xen-devel , Ian Campbell , the arch/x86 maintainers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Yinghai Lu wrote: > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >> it certainly looks thin enough to me although i'm really not sure we >> want to virtualize at the IO-APIC level. Peter, what's your >> opinion/preference? >> >> > > relative fixed mapping, always make it simple and tracked easily. > like irq nr == gsi nr... That was a bit terse for me to understand your point. The code already has irq==gsi. Are you proposing that it stay that way, or something else? J