Re: in-kernel interrupt controller steering

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Il 06/03/2013 15:03, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
> KVM_IRQ_LINE is basically an IOAPIC interrupt line assert. That's
> fine. That ioctl should get an ioapic device handle to work on.

It would be a KVM_SET_DEVICE_ATTR in your case, right?

> Whether we call the IOAPIC PINs GSIs or something different is really
> just a naming question. I'd probably call it IRQ number :).

Yup.

> So again, I'm failing to see where we think differently :).

I think we're not, just making sure that the existing x86 ioctls can be
clearly mapping to what you're proposed.

The only change that came up is the rename of KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP_ARGS,
and the addition of a "none" type.  Everything else is just clarifying
the desired semantics (and Gleb correcting me on several accounts---I
hope I haven't caused more confusion).

Paolo
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux