On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 06:20:51PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > On 02/20/2013 01:58:54 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > >This is probably a stupid question, but why the > >KVM_SET_IRQCHIP/KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING interface is not appropriate for > >your purposes? > > > >x86 sets up a default GSI->IRQCHIP PIN mapping on creation (during > >KVM_SET_IRQCHIP), but it can be modified with KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING. > > To start, the whole IRQ routing stuff is poorly documented. > > Am I supposed to make up GSI numbers and use the routing thing to > associate them with real interrupts? You can consider GSI to be a cookie that you use to refer to whatever data you've put into routing table by KVM_IRQ_LINE/irqfd interface. Even on x86, when irq routing is used to inject MSI interrupt, this is exactly how GSI is used. In MSI case it does not have a meaning besides "look at that interrupt entry to see what MSI should be injected". > Are there constraints on what > sort of GSI numbers I can choose (I now see in the code that > KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES is returned from the capability check, but where > is that documented? The only constrain is that the number should be smalled than KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES, but this is implementation detail. Current implementation uses array to map from GSI to a data, if a lot more entries then currently allowed is needed implementation may be changed to different data structure. > It looks like the APIC implementation has > default routes, where is that documented?)? It is very PC centric, should not be even compiled for other arches. > Where does the code > live to manage this table, and how APICy is it (looks like the > answer is "irq_comm.c, and very")? It is a mistake to refer to the irq routing table as APICy :). It is certainly PC centric currently, but there is at least one HW layer between it and the APIC. PC has global GSI space, each GSI can be delivered via different irq chip. Some GSIs can be delivered through multiple irq chips. Irq routing table provides mapping between GSI and irq chips it should be delivered through. Some irq chips deliver interrupt via APIC some not, but this is different story. The work is needed to make the code not PC centric, but it should not be a lot of work. > I suppose I could write another > implementation of the table management code for MPIC, though the > placement of "irqchip" inside the route entry, rather than as an > argument to KVM_IRQ_LINE, suggests the table is supposed to be > global, not in the individual interrupt controller. > Yes, it is global. It sits between emulated devices and irq chips. -- Gleb. -- 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
