Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] Powerpc MSI implementation

From: Greg KH <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:27:34 -0800

On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:57:43PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> 
> > No, what's wrong with just fixing everything up to work properly all at
> > once?  The Altix code should have been a step forward in making this
> > "abstracted" into something that other arches could use.  If that's not
> > true, then please work everything so that it all works nicely together.
> >
> > In short, I don't want to see two different implementations in the tree
> > at the same time, that's not acceptable, sorry.
> 
> So you are saying that despite the current stuff being beyond repair, we
> can't provide an alternate working implementation that fits our needs
> unless we also port over Altic and Intel, which we don't know and don't
> have testing gear, not even within our arch code ?

I'm saying I don't want to see 2 different MSI implementations in the
kernel.  I'm sure you can understand this reasoning.

I misunderstood your original patches in that I thought you were
cleaning up the generic versions for everyone, not creating a separate
set of APIs.  Sorry for the misunderstanding.

thanks,

greg k-h