Hello! > What if we use KVM_MSI_VALID_DEVID flag instead of new KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI > definition? I > believe this would make an API more consistent and introduce less new definitions. I have just found one more flaw in your implementation. If you take a look at irqfd_wakeup()... --- cut --- /* An event has been signaled, inject an interrupt */ if (irq.type == KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI) kvm_set_msi(&irq, kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, 1, false); else schedule_work(&irqfd->inject); --- cut --- You apparently missed KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI here, as well as in irqfd_update(). But, if you accept my API proposal, this becomes irrelevant. Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research center Russia _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
