On 07/10/15 16:46, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Hello! > >> Sure. And you then have to parse and validate all the tables each and >> every time you're going to inject an interrupt (because the guest can >> change the table content behind your back). You are quickly going to >> notice that your performance is abysmal. > > I don't see any real problems, at least with LPI tables. If the guest changes something, it will be > immediately available to us. I don't see any need to seriously validate something, at least here. > Pending bit is just pending bit, and configuration is just priority value plus enable bit. > But, well, if we think a bit better, in case of pending bit modification, the operations on both > guest and host side have to be atomic, otherwise we can clobber our table if, for example, both host > and guest modify adjacent bits. And there's no way to interlock with the guest. So, OK, i accept > your point. The pending table is the least of our concerns. Device table, ITTs, collections. That's the real problem. M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... -- 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
