On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:37:45AM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > > > +#define KVM_ASSIGNED_DEV_MSIX ((1 << 2) | (1 << 10)) > > > > Can you explain the usage of the two bits? > > Um... Just to keep consistent with formers(one for guest and one for host), at > cost of one bit. OK > > Can drop the printk's (also from find_gsi_from_host_irq). > > Not that confident. In fact, I often triggered this during debug... IIRC, > userspace program shouldn't trigger this if kernel space works well. Maybe it > can be changed to WARN_ON() or BUG_ON() later. OK > > Check the return value? > > Yeah... > > > > > + enable_irq(irq); > > > > Do you guarantee that particular irq you're enable_irq'ing is not bogus? > > Its has been passed from userspace after all. > > It isn't passed from userspace. This one is filled by pci_enable_msix(), which > should be OK. Alright. > > So you chose GSI == 0 as invalid because of x86 assumptions? Or is there > > any other reason? > > Yeah, it based on x86 and IA64 IRQ 0 can't be used by MSI-X. And only x86 > support MSI-X now(and IA64 would follow later). OK. > > > > IRQ sharing in the host side is not supported correct? > > Um? Yeah... And seems we won't support it forever... OK. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
