Re: [PATCH 0/1] uio_pci_generic: extensions to allow access for non-privilegedprocesses
From: Avi Kivity
Date: Fri Apr 02 2010 - 02:44:00 EST
On 04/01/2010 10:24 PM, Tom Lyon wrote:
But there are multiple msi-x interrupts, how do you know which oneYou don't. This would suck for KVM, I guess, but we'd need major rework of the
generic UIO stuff to have a separate event channel for each MSI-X.
Doesn't it suck for non-kvm in the same way? Multiple vectors are there
for a reason. For example, if you have a multiqueue NIC, you'd have to
process all queues instead of just the one that triggered.
For my purposes, collapsing all the MSI-Xs into one MSI-look-alike is fine,
because I'd be using MSI anyways if I could. The weird Intel 82599 VF only
So one big question is - do we expand the whole UIO framework for KVM
requirements, or do we split off either KVM or non-VM into a separate driver?
Hans or Greg - care to opine?
Currently kvm does device assignment with its own code, I'd like to
unify it with uio, not split it off.
Separate notifications for msi-x interrupts are just as useful for uio
as they are for kvm.
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/