Re: [kvm-ia64-devel] [02/17][PATCH] Implement smp_call_function_mask for ia64 - V8

[Jes S. <je...@sg...>]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> I wasn't suggesting we shouldn't have both interfaces, merely
>> questioning why adding what to me seems like an unnecessary performance
>> hit for the classic case of the call.
> 
> I don't mind how many interfaces there are, so long as there only needs 
> to be one place to hook to plug in the Xen version of 
> smp_call_function_whatever.  Perhaps the answer is to just hook the IPI 
> mechanism itself rather than the whole of smp_call_function_mask...

Well we're obviously going to have at least two interfaces given that
we have the traditional Linux one and Xen seems to require something
different :-)

> Have you looked at Jens Axboe's patches to make all this stuff a lot 
> more arch-common?

Nope, do you have a pointer?

Cheers,
Jes