[kvm-devel] [PATCH] [ACPI] Enable direct GSI mapping for APIC v2

2008-05-15 Thread Alexander Graf
Hi, in the DSDT there are two different ways of defining, how an interrupt is supposed to be routed. Currently we are using the LNKA - LNKD method, which afaict is for legacy support. The other method is to directly tell the Operating System, which APIC pin the device is attached to. We can get t

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] [ACPI] Enable direct GSI mapping for APIC

2008-05-07 Thread Avi Kivity
Alexander Graf wrote: > Hi, > > in the DSDT there are two different ways of defining, how an interrupt > is supposed to be routed. Currently we are using the LNKA - LNKD > method, which afaict is for legacy support. > The other method is to directly tell the Operating System, which APIC > pin th

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] [ACPI] Enable direct GSI mapping for APIC

2008-05-03 Thread Alexander Graf
On May 2, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 04:55:24PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: >> Hi, >> >> in the DSDT there are two different ways of defining, how an >> interrupt >> is supposed to be routed. Currently we are using the LNKA - LNKD >> method, >> which a

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] [ACPI] Enable direct GSI mapping for APIC

2008-05-02 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 04:55:24PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > Hi, > > in the DSDT there are two different ways of defining, how an interrupt > is supposed to be routed. Currently we are using the LNKA - LNKD method, > which afaict is for legacy support. > The other method is to directly tell

[kvm-devel] [PATCH] [ACPI] Enable direct GSI mapping for APIC

2008-05-02 Thread Alexander Graf
Hi, in the DSDT there are two different ways of defining, how an interrupt is supposed to be routed. Currently we are using the LNKA - LNKD method, which afaict is for legacy support. The other method is to directly tell the Operating System, which APIC pin the device is attached to. We can ge