On 08/15/2012 02:26 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
Yes, I understand. It's simple, it's also very specific to this
problem, and doesn't address generic ack notification. All of which
I've noted before and I continue to note that v8 offers simplifications
while retaining flexibility. Least
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:09:43PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 02:00 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:41:05PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 01:06 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:34:01PM
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:52:13AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Using the EOI as a trigger to de-assert and potentially re-assert may be
a hack, but it's about as close as we can come to following the behavior
of hardware.
It's actually quite similar to an apic re-sampling inputs
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:10:15PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:52:13AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Using the EOI as a trigger to de-assert and potentially re-assert may be
a hack, but it's about as close as we can come to following the behavior
of hardware.
On 08/12/2012 12:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Michael, would the interface be more acceptable to you if we added
separate ioctls to allocate and free some representation of an irq
source ID, gsi pair? For instance, an ioctl might return an idr entry
for an irq source ID/gsi object which
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 03:35:54PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/12/2012 12:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Michael, would the interface be more acceptable to you if we added
separate ioctls to allocate and free some representation of an irq
source ID, gsi pair? For instance, an ioctl
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 11:35 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:09:43PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 02:00 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:41:05PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 01:06 +0300,
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:35 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/12/2012 12:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Michael, would the interface be more acceptable to you if we added
separate ioctls to allocate and free some representation of an irq
source ID, gsi pair? For instance, an ioctl might
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 04:01:15PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:35 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/12/2012 12:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Michael, would the interface be more acceptable to you if we added
separate ioctls to allocate and free some
On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 02:04 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 04:01:15PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:35 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/12/2012 12:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Michael, would the interface be more acceptable to you
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 10:49 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:06:42PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 19:12 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:36 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 06:26:31PM -0600,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:15AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 10:49 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:06:42PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 19:12 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:36 +0300,
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 19:59 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:15AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 10:49 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:06:42PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 19:12 -0600,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:17:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 19:59 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:15AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 10:49 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:06:42PM
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 22:50 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:17:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 19:59 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:15AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 10:49 +0300,
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 12:33 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:26:15PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the implementation, instead of a linked list, would
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 11:36 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/09/2012 10:26 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the implementation, instead of a linked list, would an array
of counters
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 02:48:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 22:50 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:17:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 19:59 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:48:15AM
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:23:24PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 12:33 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:26:15PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:34:01PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 11:36 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/09/2012 10:26 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 00:50 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 02:48:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 22:50 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:17:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 19:59 +0300,
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 01:06 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:34:01PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 11:36 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/09/2012 10:26 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:22:12PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 00:50 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 02:48:25PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 22:50 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:17:25PM
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:41:05PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 01:06 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:34:01PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 11:36 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/09/2012 10:26 PM, Alex Williamson
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 02:00 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:41:05PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 01:06 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:34:01PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-12 at 11:36 +0300,
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:06:42PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 19:12 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:36 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 06:26:31PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:01 +0300,
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 01:17:12PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 07/24/2012 11:43 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to be triggered when an EOI is
written for a specified irqchip pin. The first user of this will
be external device assignment through VFIO, using a
On 08/09/2012 10:26 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the implementation, instead of a linked list, would an array
of counters parallel to the bitmap make it simpler?
Or even, replace the
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:26:15PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the implementation, instead of a linked list, would an array
of counters parallel to the bitmap make it simpler?
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:40 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the implementation, instead of a linked list, would an array
of counters parallel to the bitmap make it simpler?
Or even, replace the bitmap with an array of counters.
I'm not sure a
On 07/24/2012 11:43 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to be triggered when an EOI is
written for a specified irqchip pin. The first user of this will
be external device assignment through VFIO, using a level irqfd
for asserting a PCI INTx interrupt and this
On 08/06/2012 01:17 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
+4.77 KVM_EOIFD
+
+Capability: KVM_CAP_EOIFD
+Architectures: x86
+Type: vm ioctl
+Parameters: struct kvm_eoifd (in)
+Returns: 0 on success, 0 on error
+
+KVM_EOIFD allows userspace to receive interrupt EOI notification
+through an eventfd.
On 08/06/2012 01:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Regarding the implementation, instead of a linked list, would an array
of counters parallel to the bitmap make it simpler?
Or even, replace the bitmap with an array of counters.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 07:12:15PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
kvm_eoifd.fd specifies the eventfd used for
+notification. KVM_EOIFD_FLAG_DEASSIGN is used to de-assign an
eoifd
+once assigned. KVM_EOIFD also requires additional bits set in
+kvm_eoifd.flags
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 19:12 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:36 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 06:26:31PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:01 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
You keep saying this but it is still true:
On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 17:54 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:43:22PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to be triggered when an EOI is
written for a specified irqchip pin. The first user of this will
be external device assignment
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:22:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 17:54 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:43:22PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to be triggered when an EOI is
written for a specified irqchip
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:01 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:22:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 17:54 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:43:22PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 06:26:31PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:01 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:22:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 17:54 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:43:22PM
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:36 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 06:26:31PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 03:01 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:22:10AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 17:54 +0300,
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:43:22PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to be triggered when an EOI is
written for a specified irqchip pin. The first user of this will
be external device assignment through VFIO, using a level irqfd
for asserting a PCI INTx interrupt
This new ioctl enables an eventfd to be triggered when an EOI is
written for a specified irqchip pin. The first user of this will
be external device assignment through VFIO, using a level irqfd
for asserting a PCI INTx interrupt and this interface for de-assert
and notification once the interrupt
42 matches
Mail list logo
