On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:26:48 pm Gregory Haskins wrote: > Hi Rusty, > > Rusty Russell wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 04:19:17 am Gregory Haskins wrote: > >> Avi Kivity wrote: > >>> Gregory Haskins wrote: > >>> One idea is similar to signalfd() or eventfd() > >> > >> And thus the "kvm-eventfd" (irqfd/iosignalfd) interface project was > >> born. ;) > > > > The lguest patch queue already has such an interface :) > > Cool! Ultimately I think it will be easier if both lguest+kvm support > the same eventfd notion so this is good you are already moving in the > same direction. Not really; lguest doesn't do PCI. > > And I have a partially complete in-kernel virtio_pci patch with the same > > trick. > > I thought lguest didn't use pci? Or do you just mean that you have an > in-kernel virtio-net for lguest? No, this was for kvm. Sorry for the confusion. > Other than the potential rcu issues that Paul already addressed, looks > good. FWIW: this looks like what we are calling "iosignalfd" on the kvm > land (unless I am misunderstanding). Do you have the equivalent of > "irqfd" going the other way? Yes; lguest uses write() (offset indicates cpu #) rather than ioctls, but anyone can do the LHREQ_IRQ write to queue an interrupt for delivery. So the threads just get the same /dev/lguest fd and it's simple. Thanks! Rusty. -- 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
