[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <E959C4978C3B6342920538CF579893F00230D036@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 23:48:50 +0000
From: "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jiang Liu <jiang.liu-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@...lic.gmane.org>
CC: "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org>,
"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [v3 13/26] KVM: Define a new interface kvm_find_dest_vcpu() for
VT-d PI
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:paolo.bonzini@...il.com] On Behalf Of Paolo
> Bonzini
> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 7:59 PM
> To: Wu, Feng; Paolo Bonzini; Zhang, Yang Z; Thomas Gleixner; Ingo Molnar; H.
> Peter Anvin; x86@...nel.org; Gleb Natapov; dwmw2@...radead.org;
> joro@...tes.org; Alex Williamson; Jiang Liu
> Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; KVM list;
> Eric Auger
> Subject: Re: [v3 13/26] KVM: Define a new interface kvm_find_dest_vcpu() for
> VT-d PI
>
>
>
> On 19/12/2014 02:30, Wu, Feng wrote:
> >>> How this can work well? All subsequent interrupts are delivered to
> >>> one vCPU? It shouldn't be the best solution, need more consideration.
> >>
> >> Well, it's a hardware limitation. The alternative (which is easy to
> >> implement) is to only do PI for single-CPU interrupts. This should work
> >> well for multiqueue NICs (and of course for UP guests :)), so perhaps
> >> it's a good idea to only support that as a first attempt.
> >>
> >> Paolo
> >
> > Paolo, what do you mean by "single-CPU interrupts"? Do you mean we don't
> > support lowest priority interrupts for PI? But Linux OS uses lowest priority
> > for most of the case? If so, we can hardly get benefit from this feature for
> > Linux guest OS.
>
> You can post lowest priority interrupts if they are delivered to a
> single CPU, in which case they are effectively fixed priority.
>
> If they are broadcast to multiple CPUs, do not post them.
>
> Paolo
In my understanding, lowest priority interrupts are always delivered to a
Single CPU, we need to find the right destination CPU from the cpumask.
This is what I do in this patch. Did I misunderstanding something in your
Comments? Thanks a lot!
Actually, we don't support posting broadcast/multicast interrupts, because
the interrupt is associated with one Posted-interrupts descriptor, then one
vCPU.
Thanks,
Feng
--
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