Yes, save for the dynamic TPR enhancement. (Already addressed by Alan, etc,
in other postings.)
> - I believe the way forward here is to work with James Bottomley,
> who has a nice abstraction of the areas your patch touches for
> his Voyager sub-architecture.
> Linus has however been completley silent on the x86-subarch idea
> despite heavyweights like Alan and Ingo adding their support...
> If you go this route, James' base needs to go in first
> (converting just the in-kernel visws support). After which, adding
> support for Voyager, Summit and any other wacky x86esque hardware
> is a simple non-intrusive patch that touches subarch specific areas.
> - Some of the code you've added looks along the lines of..
>
> if (numaq)
> foo();
> else if (summit)
> foo2();
> else
> foo3();
>
> Would it be over-abstracting to have some form of APIC struct,
> defining pointers to various routines instead of lots of ugly
> if's/switches/fall-through's.
>
> However, the last point may be completley pointless after adapting to
> use what James B has come up with..
>
> Dave
All the if/else chains are in init code, where a few more microseconds for
some extra branches isn't important. However, a nice sub-arch abstraction
would be welcome.
Thanks!
-- James Cleverdon IBM xSeries Linux Solutions {jamesclv(Unix, preferred), cleverdj(Notes)} at us dot ibm dot com- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/