> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 6:22 PM > To: Avi Kivity > Cc: Jan Kiszka; Thomas Gleixner; Alex Williamson; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ren, Yongjie > Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI > interrupts > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 01:01:41PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 06/08/2012 05:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Pls correct me if I'm wrong. > > > > > > Well, IIRC, the "don't loop over all vcpus with IRQs or preemption > > > disabled" was one argument against direct legacy interrupt injection as > > > well. That's what I kept in mind from those discussions. Maybe Avi can > > > comment on the current position. > > > > It's still my position. > > > > IMO we need something like struct gfn_to_hva_cache for interrupts. If > > it's in the cache, we fast-path it from the interrupt handler. If not, > > fall back to a workqueue and let it refill the cache. > > And you class the irqfd behaviour of injecting multicast > with interrupts disabled a bug then? > Hi Avi & Michael, Any more news on this issue ? > > -- > > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- 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
