[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100401202100.GL24846@8bytes.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:21:00 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Tom Lyon <pugs@...n-about.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Hans J. Koch" <hjk@...utronix.de>,
gregkh@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] uio_pci_generic: extensions to allow access for
non-privileged processes
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 12:24:45PM -0700, Tom Lyon wrote:
> For my purposes, collapsing all the MSI-Xs into one MSI-look-alike is fine,
> because I'd be using MSI anyways if I could. The weird Intel 82599 VF only
> supports MSI-X.
For KVM this is not fine. The device should look in the guest as it
looks in the host. Some devices might only support MSI-X and thus the
drivers for it only search for MSI-X and get confused when they only
find MSI.
> So one big question is - do we expand the whole UIO framework for KVM
> requirements, or do we split off either KVM or non-VM into a separate driver?
> Hans or Greg - care to opine?
We should definitly work towards a single implementation. The KVM device
passthrough requirements are not very different from that of userspace
device access.
Joerg
--
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