* Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The correct solution here is to properly separate the APIC, SMP, and
> timer code so the logic of it which we want to reuse is separated from
> the hardware dependence. Clock events and clocksources take care of
> most of the timer issues, but there is still ugliness from SMP timer
> events depending on having part of the APIC infrastructure for wiring
> the interrupt gates.
what are you talking about? A clockevents driver does not need to know
about lapic details, at all. In terms of interrupt gates for the
hypervisor to notify about clock events - use a virtual interrupt
controller via genirq.
if you want to use hardwired hardware details as your API: DO IT WITHOUT
MODIFYING LINUX. If you want anything more intelligent, something more
'paravirtual' - WORK WITH US AND WORK WITH THE OTHER HYPERVISORS. So far
all i've seen from you was excuses and stonewalling on every step! We
told you about the need to do VMI-timer ontop of clockevents last year
already! You resisted virtually EVERY SINGLE cleanup suggestion since
your stuff got upstream and you ONLY acted when a change was force-fed
to you. Just count the number of emails you wrote, versus the patches
you did. And your code is barely 2 weeks in! That is unacceptable.
Ingo
-
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/
