----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com>
> To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "alex williamson" <alex.william...@redhat.com>,
> borntrae...@de.ibm.com, fel...@nutanix.com
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 11:33:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] virtio: access ISR atomically
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 02:49:58PM -0500, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com>
> > > To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "alex williamson"
> > > <alex.william...@redhat.com>, borntrae...@de.ibm.com, fel...@nutanix.com
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 6:55:50 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] virtio: access ISR atomically
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 07:05:50PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > > @@ -1318,10 +1318,18 @@ void virtio_del_queue(VirtIODevice *vdev, int
> > > > n)
> > > > vdev->vq[n].vring.num_default = 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static void virtio_set_isr(VirtIODevice *vdev, int value)
> > > > +{
> > > > + uint8_t old = atomic_read(&vdev->isr);
> > > > + if ((old & value) != value) {
> > > > + atomic_or(&vdev->isr, value);
> > > > + }
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Paolo, can you pls comment on why is it done like this,
> > > as opposed to a single atomic_or?
> >
> > To avoid cacheline bouncing in the common case where MSI is active
> > but the host doesn't read ISR.
>
> You mean the guest does not read ISR?
> And so this helps keep the field read-mostly for all CPUs,
> sharing the cache line. OK but this is worth documenting.
Yes, v3 on the way.
Paolo
