[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <69a5cd834b3196606b805f384353e3d9fc839981.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2025 01:14:13 +0000
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
<seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: "shaju.abraham@...anix.com" <shaju.abraham@...anix.com>,
"khushit.shah@...anix.com" <khushit.shah@...anix.com>, "x86@...nel.org"
<x86@...nel.org>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "stable@...r.kernel.org"
<stable@...r.kernel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com"
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Kohler, Jon" <jon@...anix.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: x86: Add x2APIC "features" to control EOI
broadcast suppression
On Wed, 2025-12-03 at 00:50 +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
>
> Since it's uAPI, are we expecting the two flags to have impact on in-kernel
> ioapic?
>
> I think there should no harm to make the two also apply to in-kernel ioapic.
>
> E.g., for now we can reject KVM_X2APIC_ENABLE_SUPPRESS_EOI_BROADCAST flag for
> in-kernel ioapic. In the future, we might add EOI register support to in-kernel
> ioapic and report supporting suppress EOI broadcast, then we can in-kernel
> ioapic to honor these two flags too.
The simplest option is probably to fix the in-kernel I/O APIC at the
same time, bumping the version to 0x20 and adding support for the EOI
register in the KVM_SUPPRESS_EOI_ENABLED case.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5069 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists