On 2011-10-17 16:28, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 01:27:31PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2011-10-17 13:22, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:28:16AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> Devices models are usually not interested in specifying MSI-X >>>> configuration details beyond the number of vectors to provide and the >>>> BAR number to use. Layout of an exclusively used BAR and its >>>> registration can also be handled centrally. >>>> >>>> This is the purpose of msix_init_simple. It provides handy services to >>>> the existing users. Future users like device assignment may require more >>>> detailed setup specification. For them we will (re-)introduce msix_init >>>> with the full list of configuration option (in contrast to the current >>>> code). >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Well, this seems a bit of a code churn then, doesn't it? >>> We are also discussing using memory BAR for virtio-pci for other >>> stuff besides MSI-X, so the last user of the _simple variant >>> will be ivshmem then? >> >> We will surely see more MSI-X users over the time. Not sure if they all >> mix their MSIX-X BARs with other stuff. But e.g. the e1000 variant I >> have here does not. So there should be users in the future. >> >> Jan > > Question is, how hard is to pass in the BAR and the offset? That is trivial. But have a look at the final simple implementation. It also manages the container memory region for table and PBA and registers/unregisters that container as BAR. So there is measurable added-value. Jan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
