On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 05:11:19PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 04:06:20PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > >>
> > >> So instead of
> > >>
> > >> - guest reads/writes msix
> > >> - kvm filters mmio, implements some, passes others to userspace
> > >>
> > >> we have
> > >>
> > >> - guest reads/writes msix
> > >> - kvm implements all
> > >> - some writes generate an additional notification to userspace
> > >
> > >I suppose we don't need to generate notification to userspace? Because
> > >every
> > >read/write is handled by kernel, and userspace just need interface to
> > >kernel to
> > >get/set the entry - and well, does userspace need to do it when kernel can
> > >handle
> > >all of them? Maybe not...
> >
> > We could have the kernel handle addr/data writes by setting up an
> > internal interrupt routing. A disadvantage is that more work is
> > needed if we emulator interrupt remapping in qemu.
>
> As an alternative, interrupt remapping will need some API rework, right?
> Existing APIs only pass address/data for msi.
>
IIRC interrupt remapping works with address/data to. It just interpret
it differently from apic.
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
