WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] irq_guest_eoi_timer interaction with MSI

To: "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] irq_guest_eoi_timer interaction with MSI
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:00:13 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 05:00:00 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C542F881.1F388%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <491D52E8.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx> <C542F881.1F388%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 14.11.08 10:42 >>>
>On 14/11/08 09:28, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> So we'd add a pirq-indexed bitmap to mitigate that. Whether we use
>>> PHYSDEVOP_irq_eoi or EVTCHNOP_unmask, we need a new shared-memory bitmap,
>>> right? Might as well use irq_eoi and index by pirq, I'd say.
>> 
>> Hmm, I'm still not convinced: With what you propose, it's unclear to me who
>> would when clear the bit in that bitmap for the 'temporarily masked' case.
>> Anyway, unless you get to implement your version earlier (and thus
>> convince me that things will work out correctly), I'll try to get implemented
>> what I would think should be appropriate here once I find time to do so.
>
>Perhaps if we go your route we can make PHYSDEVOP_irq_eoi obsolete? It's
>only really called where we also do an unmask, and it's pointless to have
>two hypercalls where one will do. So a guest that detects the new bitmap
>could then know it only needs to unmask-by-hypercall, rather than use
>PHYSDEVOP_irq_eoi at all.

Yes, folding the potentially two hypercalls into one was a parallel idea.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>