Hello!
> What if we use KVM_MSI_VALID_DEVID flag instead of new
> KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI
> definition? I
> believe this would make an API more consistent and introduce less new
> definitions.
I have just found one more flaw in your implementation. If you take a look at
irqfd_wakeup()...
--- cut ---
/* An event has been signaled, inject an interrupt */
if (irq.type == KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI)
kvm_set_msi(&irq, kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, 1,
false);
else
schedule_work(&irqfd->inject);
--- cut ---
You apparently missed KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI here, as well as in
irqfd_update(). But, if you
accept my API proposal, this becomes irrelevant.
Kind regards,
Pavel Fedin
Expert Engineer
Samsung Electronics Research center Russia
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
