On 10/09/19 08:15, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> And what about even ones? :)
>
> Sorry, just joking, but the "odd" qualifier here looks a little weird,
> maybe something like "non-standard develiry modes" might make sense
> here.
Indeed, folded this into the commit message. Thanks Christoph.
And what about even ones? :)
Sorry, just joking, but the "odd" qualifier here looks a little weird,
maybe something like "non-standard develiry modes" might make sense
here.
On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 21:46, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> We can easily route hardware interrupts directly into VM context when
> they target the "Fixed" or "LowPriority" delivery modes.
>
> However, on modes such as "SMI" or "Init", we need to go via KVM code
> to actually put the vCPU into a
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:58:18PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> We can easily route hardware interrupts directly into VM context when
> they target the "Fixed" or "LowPriority" delivery modes.
>
> However, on modes such as "SMI" or "Init", we need to go via KVM code
> to actually put the vCPU
> On 5 Sep 2019, at 15:58, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> We can easily route hardware interrupts directly into VM context when
> they target the "Fixed" or "LowPriority" delivery modes.
>
> However, on modes such as "SMI" or "Init", we need to go via KVM code
> to actually put the vCPU into a
We can easily route hardware interrupts directly into VM context when
they target the "Fixed" or "LowPriority" delivery modes.
However, on modes such as "SMI" or "Init", we need to go via KVM code
to actually put the vCPU into a different mode of operation, so we can
not post the interrupt
Add
6 matches
Mail list logo
