Re: [RFC] Summit interrupt routing patches

[Alan Cox]

> idle CPUs.  If none are idle, then aim them at the CPUs running the "least 
> important" tasks.  Also, since each CPU's local APIC only has two interrupt 
> latches per `level' (the upper nibble of the IRQ's vector), it would be a 
> good idea to avoid sending IRQs to those CPUs that are already processing one.

Im not sure aiming at least important is worth anything. Aiming at idle 
processors on a box not doing power management seems easy providing you'll
accept 99.99% accuracy. Switch the priority up in the idle code, switch it
back down again before the idle task schedule()'s. If you hit during the
schedule well tough.

> soon.  I wonder if Marcelo is going to allow this kind of futzing around with 
> interrupt and scheduler code in 2.4....

Thats another reason to keep it small and clean.