On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 01:05:20PM +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote: > On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Christoffer Dall > <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 08:10:43PM +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote: [...] > > > feels like this suggestion would be easier to digest in an RFC patch > > instead of on this thread.). > > Sorry for the top-post. An RFC patch is our intention behind this > discussion. In my opinion implementing IRQ routing is the way to go > for proper irqfd support, but I hope on some kind of agreement that > this would be the acceptable direction for KVM/VGIC :) > Thanks for the explanation. I indeed think an RFC patch is the next logical step from here. -Christoffer _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
