[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A40BB73.600@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:24:35 +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, mtosatti@...hat.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, markmc@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v8 3/3] KVM: add iosignalfd support
On 06/23/2009 01:48 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:57:53PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> On 06/23/2009 11:56 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:30:46PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> +static int
>>>> +iosignalfd_group_in_range(struct kvm_io_device *this, gpa_t addr, int len,
>>>> + int is_write)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct _iosignalfd_group *p = to_group(this);
>>>> +
>>>> + return ((addr>= p->addr&& (addr< p->addr + p->length)));
>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I think I see a problem here. For virtio, we do not necessarily want all
>>> virtqueues for a device to live in kernel: there might be control
>>> virtqueues that we want to leave in userspace. Since this claims all
>>> writes to a specific address, the signal never makes it to userspace.
>>>
>>>
>> Userspace could create an eventfd for this control queue and wait for it
>> to fire.
>>
>
> What if guest writes an unexpected value there?
> The value it simply lost ... that's not very elegant.
>
True, it's better to have a lossless interface.
--
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