>>> On 09.11.15 at 15:24, <julien.gr...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 09/11/15 14:20, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 07:11 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 09.11.15 at 15:01, <ian.campb...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> SPIs are too numerous and not indivcidually as interesting. >>>> >>>> Make the exists #IPIS counter x86 specific. >>> >>> I'd recommend not to - even if ARM doesn't want to use it, it's still a >>> pretty generic thing. >> >> ARM calls these "SGIs" (Software Generated Is), but I suppose I don't mind >> keeping the #IPIS around and generic though. > > With this patch the only usage of #IPIS is in arch/x86. It will confuse > the user because #IPIs will always be 0 on ARM.
There are quite a few counters which will (perhaps under some conditions) remain to be zero. > So I don't see any point to keep the definition common. I think "IPI" is a generic enough concept (and afaia not one introduced through x86, not even just its name) to allow for possible future ports to use this. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
