On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:59:46PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/05/2012 05:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:35:43PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 08/22/2012 03:41 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I assumed you were pointing out the level vs edge interaction. If we > >> >> call that a userspace bug, I can just drop this. Thanks, > >> >> > >> >> Alex > >> > > >> > level is userspace bug I think :) > >> > >> I don't see how it's a bug. Suppose we have a vfio device that shares a > >> gsi with an emulated device. The emulated device naturally uses > >> KVM_IRQ_LINE (it has no need to re-sample on ADN), while vfio naturally > >> has to use irqfd. > > > > Absolutely. But vfio needs to use irqfd with the new flag. > > Using existing irqfd for level is a bug. > > I see we're not reusing this irq source id for level irqfd. But I think > we should, there's no need for per-gsi irq source id. I agree. All resample irqfds are deasserted at the same time, tracking them separately gets us nothing. > Plus I'd like to > fix the theoretical bug even if it doesn't bite in practice. > I'm not sure what the bug is, for edge, and how a separate ID fixes it. Could you clarify? > > -- > 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
