RE: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

[Ren, Yongjie]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 6:22 PM
> To: Avi Kivity
> Cc: Jan Kiszka; Thomas Gleixner; Alex Williamson; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ren, Yongjie
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI
> interrupts
> 
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 01:01:41PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 06/08/2012 05:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Pls correct me if I'm wrong.
> > >
> > > Well, IIRC, the "don't loop over all vcpus with IRQs or preemption
> > > disabled" was one argument against direct legacy interrupt injection as
> > > well. That's what I kept in mind from those discussions. Maybe Avi can
> > > comment on the current position.
> >
> > It's still my position.
> >
> > IMO we need something like struct gfn_to_hva_cache for interrupts.  If
> > it's in the cache, we fast-path it from the interrupt handler.  If not,
> > fall back to a workqueue and let it refill the cache.
> 
> And you class the irqfd behaviour of injecting multicast
> with interrupts disabled a bug then?
> 
Hi Avi & Michael,
Any more news on this issue ?

> > --
> > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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/