> -----Original Message----- > From: Radim Krčmář [mailto:rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 2:59 AM > To: Wu, Feng <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] KVM: x86: Use vector-hashing to deliver lowest- > priority interrupts > > 2016-01-25 16:53+0800, Feng Wu: > > Use vector-hashing to deliver lowest-priority interrupts, As an > > example, modern Intel CPUs in server platform use this method to > > handle lowest-priority interrupts. > > > > Signed-off-by: Feng Wu <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > With any proposed resolution of BUG_ON in kvm_vector_to_index, > > Reviewed-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > @@ -123,6 +123,9 @@ module_param(tsc_tolerance_ppm, uint, S_IRUGO | > S_IWUSR); > > +bool __read_mostly vector_hashing = true; > > (Module param can be static.) > > > +module_param(vector_hashing, bool, S_IRUGO); Thanks a lot for your comments, Radim & Paolo! Paolo, given that the only two comments above, do I need to send v5? Or you can handle it while merging them? I am fine with both methods. Thanks, Feng ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����o�^n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�
