[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101026170841.GA10708@dumpdata.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:08:41 -0400
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/5] xen: events: use
irq_alloc_desc(_at) instead of open-coding an IRQ allocator.
> In that case we should use dynamic allocation for everything. Or try to
> work out distinct irq ranges for different interrupts if you really want
> to keep irq==gsi.
Some little alarm bells are ringing in the back of my head about irq != gsi.
I think the issue was the permission. When a PCI device is allocated to the
PV guest, we do a bunch of xc_* calls to allow the domain to use the BARs
and the IRQ. I believe when the guest boots and tries to map the
event channel with the physical IRQ, one of the arguments is that GSI. And
if we provide a bogus GSI, well, we won't get the INTx to the guest.
As you mentioned, Stefano's patch add a new element to the tuple that can
contain the GSI value. At which point we can make the guest IRQ != GSI,
as long as we can contain the <gsi, event channel> mapping present so
that for the hypercalls we can give it the right GSI.
The MSI/MSI-X use a completly different mechanism that does not all
of this complication, so we are OK with that.
.. snip ..
> d) dynamically allocate all irqs for all event channel types.
<nods> Ok, you sold me on this idea.
--
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