On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:09:32PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > > A tight coupling between PCI devices and the APIC is just going to cause
> > > us problems later one. I'm going to come back to the fact that these are
> > > memory writes so once we get IOMMU support they will presumably be
> > > subject to remapping by that, just like any other memory access.
> >
> > I'm not suggesting the qemu_irq will extend all the way to the apic.
> > Think of it as connecting the device core with its interrupt unit.
> >
> > > Even ignoring that, qemu_irq isn't really the right interface. A MSI is a
> > > one- off event, not a level state. OTOH stl_phys is exactly the right
> > > interface.
> >
> > The qemu_irq callback should do an stl_phys().  The device is happy
> > since it's using the same API it uses for non-MSI. 
> 
> MSI provides multiple edge triggered interrupts, whereas traditional mode 
> provides a single level triggered interrupt. My guess is most devices will 
> want to treat these differently anyway.

So, is qemu_send_msi better than qemu_set_irq.

> Either way, this is an implementation detail between pci.c and individual 
> devices. It has nothing to do with the APIC.
> 
> Paul

-- 
MST
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to