[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <E959C4978C3B6342920538CF579893F00C2B1248@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 04:44:20 +0000
From: "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krcmár <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: x86: Use vector-hashing to deliver
lowest-priority interrupts
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:pbonzini@...hat.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 18, 2016 6:42 PM
> To: Wu, Feng <feng.wu@...el.com>; Radim Krcmár <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: x86: Use vector-hashing to deliver lowest-
> priority interrupts
>
>
>
> On 18/01/2016 06:19, Wu, Feng wrote:
> > However,
> > this will make the vector-hashing lowest-priority handling slightly different
> > compare to round-robin, since RR checks "!dst[i]" before injecting the
> > interrupts. What is your opinion about it? Thanks a lot!
>
> I think Radim's suggestion is fine. You can print an error (just once
> per guest) to dmesg if the result of the hashing computation corresponds
> to a disabled APIC.
Good idea, is there already a convenient way to do this in KVM?
Thanks,
Feng
>
> Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists