[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FDF0A68.7080004@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:00:56 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"mtosatti@...hat.com" <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"yongjie.ren@...el.com" <yongjie.ren@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts
On 06/11/2012 01:21 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 01:01:41PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 06/08/2012 05:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Pls correct me if I'm wrong.
>> >
>> > Well, IIRC, the "don't loop over all vcpus with IRQs or preemption
>> > disabled" was one argument against direct legacy interrupt injection as
>> > well. That's what I kept in mind from those discussions. Maybe Avi can
>> > comment on the current position.
>>
>> It's still my position.
>>
>> IMO we need something like struct gfn_to_hva_cache for interrupts. If
>> it's in the cache, we fast-path it from the interrupt handler. If not,
>> fall back to a workqueue and let it refill the cache.
>
> And you class the irqfd behaviour of injecting multicast
> with interrupts disabled a bug then?
Yes (a minor one).
--
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