Wu, Feng wrote on 2014-12-19: > > > Paolo Bonzini wrote on 2014-12-19: >> jiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Cc: eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; >> iommu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: [v3 13/26] KVM: Define a new interface >> kvm_find_dest_vcpu() for VT-d PI >> >> >> >> On 18/12/2014 15:49, Zhang, Yang Z wrote: >>>>> Here, we introduce a similar way with 'apic_arb_prio' to handle >>>>> guest lowest priority interrtups when VT-d PI is used. Here is >>>>> the >>>>> ideas: - Each vCPU has a counter 'round_robin_counter'. - When >>>>> guests sets an interrupts to lowest priority, we choose the vCPU >>>>> with smallest 'round_robin_counter' as the destination, then >>>>> increase it. >>> >>> How this can work well? All subsequent interrupts are delivered to >>> one vCPU? It shouldn't be the best solution, need more consideration. >> >> Well, it's a hardware limitation. The alternative (which is easy to >> implement) is to only do PI for single-CPU interrupts. This should >> work well for multiqueue NICs (and of course for UP guests :)), so >> perhaps it's a good idea to only support that as a first attempt. >> >> Paolo > > Paolo, what do you mean by "single-CPU interrupts"? Do you mean we It should be same idea as I mentioned on another thread: deliver the interrupt to a single CPU(maybe the first matched VCPU?) > don't support lowest priority interrupts for PI? But Linux OS uses > lowest priority for most of the case? If so, we can hardly get benefit > from this feature for Linux guest OS. > > Thanks, > Feng > >> >>> Also, I think you should take the apic_arb_prio into consider >>> since the priority is for the whole vCPU not for one interrupt. Best regards, Yang -- 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
