Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
On Tuesday 30 December 2008 18:41:54 Avi Kivity wrote: > Sheng Yang wrote: > >>> MASK_MSIX, and UNMASK, every two action are in pairs but we have to use > >>> twice bits to store them. So I'd like to use MSI_ACTION approach... > >> > >> Well, it you have flags without ENABLE_MSI, doesn't it imply > >> DISABLE_MSI? > >> > >> The structure contains the state we want to reach, not a command we wish > >> the kernel to perform. > > > > Yes, that's what I want. But check more than one flags(for MSI-X) to > > determine where to go is not that clear. So I add a flag here to indicate > > the operation type which I think is a little more clear. > > Don't understand. Do you mean MSI and MSI-X are mutually exclusive? > > If so, we can add a comment. Yes, MSI/MSI-X are mutually exclusive. OK, I will try to keep this, just hope the logic of code won't become too complicate.. -- regards Yang, Sheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
Sheng Yang wrote: MASK_MSIX, and UNMASK, every two action are in pairs but we have to use twice bits to store them. So I'd like to use MSI_ACTION approach... Well, it you have flags without ENABLE_MSI, doesn't it imply DISABLE_MSI? The structure contains the state we want to reach, not a command we wish the kernel to perform. Yes, that's what I want. But check more than one flags(for MSI-X) to determine where to go is not that clear. So I add a flag here to indicate the operation type which I think is a little more clear. Don't understand. Do you mean MSI and MSI-X are mutually exclusive? If so, we can add a comment. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
On Tuesday 30 December 2008 18:31:16 Avi Kivity wrote: > Sheng Yang wrote: > > On Tuesday 30 December 2008 18:19:29 Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Sheng Yang wrote: > >>> For MSI disable feature later. > >>> > >>> Notice I changed ABI here, but due to no userspace patch, I think it's > >>> OK. > >> > >> It's not okay, since eventually we will have userspace and it will have > >> to work with older kernels as well. > >> > >> No released kernel has KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_ENABLE_MSI, so it's fine, > >> provided I fold this into the 2.6.29 submission. However, why do this > >> at all? It can only cause confusion. > > > > If we have ENABLE_MSI, and DISABLE, and ENABLE_MSIX, and DISABLE, and > > MASK_MSIX, and UNMASK, every two action are in pairs but we have to use > > twice bits to store them. So I'd like to use MSI_ACTION approach... > > Well, it you have flags without ENABLE_MSI, doesn't it imply DISABLE_MSI? > > The structure contains the state we want to reach, not a command we wish > the kernel to perform. Yes, that's what I want. But check more than one flags(for MSI-X) to determine where to go is not that clear. So I add a flag here to indicate the operation type which I think is a little more clear. -- regards Yang, Sheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
Sheng Yang wrote: On Tuesday 30 December 2008 18:19:29 Avi Kivity wrote: Sheng Yang wrote: For MSI disable feature later. Notice I changed ABI here, but due to no userspace patch, I think it's OK. It's not okay, since eventually we will have userspace and it will have to work with older kernels as well. No released kernel has KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_ENABLE_MSI, so it's fine, provided I fold this into the 2.6.29 submission. However, why do this at all? It can only cause confusion. If we have ENABLE_MSI, and DISABLE, and ENABLE_MSIX, and DISABLE, and MASK_MSIX, and UNMASK, every two action are in pairs but we have to use twice bits to store them. So I'd like to use MSI_ACTION approach... Well, it you have flags without ENABLE_MSI, doesn't it imply DISABLE_MSI? The structure contains the state we want to reach, not a command we wish the kernel to perform. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
On Tuesday 30 December 2008 18:19:29 Avi Kivity wrote: > Sheng Yang wrote: > > For MSI disable feature later. > > > > Notice I changed ABI here, but due to no userspace patch, I think it's > > OK. > > It's not okay, since eventually we will have userspace and it will have > to work with older kernels as well. > > No released kernel has KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_ENABLE_MSI, so it's fine, > provided I fold this into the 2.6.29 submission. However, why do this > at all? It can only cause confusion. If we have ENABLE_MSI, and DISABLE, and ENABLE_MSIX, and DISABLE, and MASK_MSIX, and UNMASK, every two action are in pairs but we have to use twice bits to store them. So I'd like to use MSI_ACTION approach... -- regards Yang, Sheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
Sheng Yang wrote: For MSI disable feature later. Notice I changed ABI here, but due to no userspace patch, I think it's OK. It's not okay, since eventually we will have userspace and it will have to work with older kernels as well. No released kernel has KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_ENABLE_MSI, so it's fine, provided I fold this into the 2.6.29 submission. However, why do this at all? It can only cause confusion. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH 1/3] KVM: Add MSI_ACTION flag for assigned irq
For MSI disable feature later.
Notice I changed ABI here, but due to no userspace patch, I think it's OK.
Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang
---
include/linux/kvm.h |3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/kvm.h b/include/linux/kvm.h
index 42f51dc..c24f207 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm.h
@@ -546,6 +546,7 @@ struct kvm_assigned_irq {
#define KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_ENABLE_IOMMU(1 << 0)
-#define KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_ENABLE_MSI (1 << 0)
+#define KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_MSI_ACTION (1 << 0)
+#define KVM_DEV_IRQ_ASSIGN_ENABLE_MSI (1 << 1)
#endif
--
1.5.4.5
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
