On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 04:41:50PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > The guest driver will never see such an interrupt as we will notice on
> > its arrival that there is some mask pending.
>
> Right, I was thinking more about the affect at the hardware level.
In theory a broken device might assum
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 14:47 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-09 23:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 22:25 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> +static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 10:18:12PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-10 21:44, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 08:40:59PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2012-01-10 20:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > But IMO this
> > shows it is a more generic interface.
>
On 2012-01-10 21:44, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 08:40:59PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-10 20:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> But IMO this
> shows it is a more generic interface.
I'm worried about adding something new that will soon become obsol
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 08:40:59PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-10 20:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> But IMO this
> >>> shows it is a more generic interface.
> >>
> >> I'm worried about adding something new that will soon become obsolete
> >> again. That's wasted effort IMHO unless w
On 2012-01-10 20:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> But IMO this
>>> shows it is a more generic interface.
>>
>> I'm worried about adding something new that will soon become obsolete
>> again. That's wasted effort IMHO unless we say today that there will be
>> no in-kernel MSI-X support.
>>
>> Jan
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 07:43:36PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-10 19:31, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 07:21:01PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> ATM writes to msi/msix mask bit have no effect for assigned
> >>> devices. For virtio, they are implemented by deassigni
On 2012-01-10 19:31, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 07:21:01PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> ATM writes to msi/msix mask bit have no effect for assigned
>>> devices. For virtio, they are implemented by deassigning irqfd
>>> which is a very slow operation (rcu write side).
>>>
>>
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 07:21:01PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > ATM writes to msi/msix mask bit have no effect for assigned
> > devices. For virtio, they are implemented by deassigning irqfd
> > which is a very slow operation (rcu write side).
> >
> > Instead, When guest writes to mask, qemu can s
On 2012-01-10 19:10, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 06:29:51PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-10 17:17, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 03:03:00PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 06:29:51PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-10 17:17, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 03:03:00PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
> >> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devi
On 2012-01-10 17:17, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 03:03:00PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
>> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
>> when passing them to a guest.
>>
>> T
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 03:03:00PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
> when passing them to a guest.
>
> The new IRQ sharing feature introduced here is optiona
On 2012-01-09 23:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 22:25 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
+static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_pci_irq_mask(struct kvm *kvm,
+ struct kvm_assig
On 2012-01-09 23:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 22:25 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
+static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_pci_irq_mask(struct kvm *kvm,
+ struct kvm_assig
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 22:25 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> +static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_pci_irq_mask(struct kvm *kvm,
> >> + struct kvm_assigned_pci_dev *assigned_dev)
> >> +{
> >> + int
On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
>> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
>> when passing them to a guest.
>>
>> The new IRQ
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
> when passing them to a guest.
>
> The new IRQ sharing feature introduced here is optional, user
PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
when passing them to a guest.
The new IRQ sharing feature introduced here is optional, user space has
to request it explicitly. Moreover, user space can i
19 matches
Mail list logo
