[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3][RFC] MSI/MSI-X support fordom0/driverdomain

  • To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 13:18:22 +0100
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 28 May 2007 05:14:26 -0700
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: Aceg/mz7PRs/d4jlSeu7V67d+hYswQACriSgAACTnuAAAZF9OQAB6/ZAAAEo6AYAAAay8AAAsQtAAABXBM0=
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3][RFC] MSI/MSI-X support fordom0/driverdomain

On 28/5/07 13:12, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> My point is:
> - Xen itself doesn't take any usage of per-domain pirq namespace
> - Dom0 can stick to BIOS-scheme or a new pirq namespace scheme
> - Dom0 can also decide the scheme of domU by pciback
> So why not let dom0 to own allocation for pirq namespace of all domains?

See the response I just posted. What if pciback is not the only place to
allocate irqs for domUs? Supporting both ways is cheap and easy even if we
don't make use of that flexibility and dom0 always does the allocation for
ever more. Case closed! :-)

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.