[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49FDCD7C.7070605@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 19:59:40 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davidel@...ilserver.org
Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v3 2/2] kvm: add support for irqfd via eventfd-notification
interface
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:33:34PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>> This allows an eventfd to be registered as an irq source with a guest. Any
>> signaling operation on the eventfd (via userspace or kernel) will inject
>> the registered GSI at the next available window.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
>>
>
> If we ever want to use this with e.g. MSI-X emulation in guest, and want
> to be stricly compliant to MSI-X, we'll need a way for guest to mask
> interrupts, and for host to report that a masked interrupt is pending.
> Ideally, all this will be doable with a couple of mmapped pages to avoid
> vmexits/system calls.
>
>
We could do this in two ways:
- move msix entry emulation into the kernel
- require the device to support replacing its irqfd, and juggle it like so:
- guest disables msi
- replace device model fd with eventfd belonging to us
- when the device fires its eventfd, set the irq pending bit
- guest enables msi
- if the pending bit is set, fire the interrupt?
- replace device model fd with the real irqfd
I'm leaning towards the latter, though it's not an easy call.
>> +static void
>> +irqfd_inject(struct work_struct *work)
>> +{
>> + struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(work, struct _irqfd, work);
>> + struct kvm *kvm = irqfd->kvm;
>> +
>> + mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>> + kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 1);
>> + kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 0);
>> + mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
>>
>
> This will do weird stuff (deliver the irq twice) if the irq is
> MSI/MSI-X. I know this was discussed already and is a temporary
> shortcut, but maybe add a comment that we really want kvm_toggle_irq,
> so that we won't forget?
>
If so, that's a bug. MSI should ignore kvm_set_irq(..., 0).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists