On 2012-03-29 17:39, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 07:47:31PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Currently, MSI messages can only be injected to in-kernel irqchips by >> defining a corresponding IRQ route for each message. This is not only >> unhandy if the MSI messages are generated "on the fly" by user space, >> IRQ routes are a limited resource that user space as to manage >> carefully. >> >> By providing a direct injection with, we can both avoid using up limited >> resources and simplify the necessary steps for user land. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Looks straight-forward to me. Others noted some > documentation nits, so I know you are going > to repost, anyway. When you do how about renaming > SET_MSI -> SEND_MSI or SIGNAL_MSI ? > We don't set anything, as such ... > > I know we have kvm_set_msi internally but this is > more or less a misnomer. KVM_SET_MSI dates back to the idea to revoke an unfinished injection. But I can also call it SIGNAL_MSI. Update will follow. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux -- 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
