On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 05:43:15PM -0600, Cam Macdonell wrote: > Hi Michael, > > I'm trying to write a uio driver for my shared memory device for KVM > and I'm running into a situation where several interrupts in quick > succession are not all triggering the callback function in my kernel > UIO driver, say 2 out of 5. My driver does not set the Interrupt > Disable bit and if it helps, I'm using MSI-X interrupts. Even without > the interrupt disable bit set, is there still a window where > successive interrupts can be lost if they arrive too quickly? > > Thanks, > Cam Yes, I think so: if an interrupt is delivered when ISR is running, it gets queued, but a second one gets lost. A queueing mechanism is necessary to avoid losing information, e.g. virtio implements exactly that. Why don't you reuse virtio for signalling? If I understand what Anthony said correctly, he objected to the specific implementation, not to the idea of reusing virtio spec and code. -- MST -- 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
