On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:52:43AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Hello! > > > A dedicated IRQ per device for something that is a system wide event > > sounds like a waste. I don't understand why a spec change is strictly > > required, we only need to support this with the specific virtual bridge > > used by QEMU, so I think that a vendor specific capability will do. > > Once this works well in the field, a PCI spec ECN might make sense > > to standardise the capability. > > Keeping track of your discussion for some time, decided to jump in... > So far, we want to have some kind of mailbox to notify the quest about > migration. So what about some dedicated "pci device" for > this purpose? Some kind of "migration controller". This is: > a) perhaps easier to implement than capability, we don't need to push > anything to PCI spec. > b) could easily make friendship with Windows, because this means that no bus > code has to be touched at all. It would rely only on > drivers' ability to communicate with each other (i guess it should be > possible in Windows, isn't it?) > c) does not need to steal resources (BARs, IRQs, etc) from the actual devices. > > Kind regards, > Pavel Fedin > Expert Engineer > Samsung Electronics Research center Russia >
Sure, or we can use an ACPI device. It doesn't really matter what we do for the mailbox. Whoever writes this first will get to select a mechanism. -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
