Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] gunyah: msgq: Add Gunyah message queues

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

 



On 09/08/2022 19:50, Elliot Berman wrote:


On 8/9/2022 4:29 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Mon, 08 Aug 2022 23:22:48 +0100,
Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In a future series, I'll add the support to load other virtual
machines. When running other virtual machines, additional gunyah
devices are needed for doorbells (e.g. to emulate interrupts for
paravirtualized devices) and to represent the vCPUs of that other
VM. Other gunyah devices are also possible, but those are the
immediate devices coming over the horizon.

Can you elaborate on this "doorbell" aspect? If you signal interrupts
to guests, they should be signalled as actual interrupts, not as some
hypervisor-specific events, as we rely on the interrupt semantics for
most things.

Or are you talking about injecting an interrupt from a guest into
another, the doorbell representing an interrupt source?


Doorbells can operate either of these modes:
  1. As simple interrupt sources. The doorbell sender makes a hypercall
     and an interrupt is raised on the receiver. The hypervisor can be
     configured to raise a specific SPI on the receiver VM and simply
     acknowledging the SPI is enough to clear the interrupt assert. No
     hypervisor-specific code is needed on the receiver to handle these
     interrupts. This is the mode one would expect to use for
     paravirtualized devices.

This sounds good.

  2. As hypervisor-specific events which must be acknowledged using
     hypercalls. We aren't currently using this advanced use-case and no
     plans currently to post these. However, I can try to briefly
     explain: These doorbells can operate on a bitfield and the sender
     can assert flags on the bitmask; the receiver can decide which bits
     should trigger the interrupt and which SPI the doorbell "runs" on.
     The "user story" for this doorbell is to support multiple sender
     using the same doorbell object. Each sender has a few designated
     bits they should set. The receiver can choose which events it wants
     an interrupt to be raised for and then can process all the pending
     events. To re-iterate, we don't have an interesting use-case for
     this yet, so don't plan on post patches for this second mode of
     doorbell.

Well. For me this sounds like 'we have such capability, no real usecase, but we want to support it anyway' kind of story. As history has shown multiple times, the order should be the opposite one. First you have the use case, then you create the API for it. Otherwise it is very easy to end up with the abstraction that looks good on the API side, but is very hard to fit into the actual user code.

I would suggest to drop the second bullet for now and focus on getting the simple doorbells done and accepted into mainline.

--
With best wishes
Dmitry




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux