Re: Multiple MSI, take 3

[Suresh Siddha]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 03:59:59PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > With interrupt-remapping, we can program the individual interrupt
> > remapping table entries to point to different cpu's etc. All we have
> > to take care is, do the IRTE allocation in a consecutive block and
> > program the starting index to the MSI registers.
> >
> > Just curious Eric, why do you think that won't work?
> 
> Working mask/unmask.  With MSI-X as specced if I mask an irq and then unmask
> it, an msi message will fire if something happened while the irq was masked
> and not taken care of before the irq was unmasked.  That is the correct
> behavior for an irq and a mmu won't let me get that.

And why do we need to mask/unmask the device in the interrupt-remapping case?

> 
> The best I can do with an iommu is to run delayed disable and set the
> interrupt remapping slot in the iommu to reject the traffic.  Which
> is almost but not quite what I want.
> 
> Overall introducing a new concept into the linux irq model seems a lot
> cleaner and more portable, and even there we are likely to be a lot
> more fragile because of the difficulty in obtaining contiguous
> vectors.
> 
> Speaking of.  How many interrupt targets does the dmar iommu have
> for interrupts?  16K?

There can be multiple interrupt-remapping units in the platform and
each of table in the remapping unit has max 64K entries.

thanks,
suresh
--
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/