[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-devel] [VTD][patch 0/5] HVM device assignment using vt-d
>From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >Sent: 2007年5月31日 23:40 > >On 31/5/07 16:30, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> OK, my rough thought is as below: >> >> The reason to change polarity, IMO, is to capture the de-assert >> edge in the physical wire and then reflect de-assertion into the virtual >> wire. Then allow the statistics on gsi_assert_count to be updated >> correctly, when shared with virtual devices in Qemu. >> >> My proposal is to take virtual EOI as the de-assertion hint, without >> any change on physical RTE property like polarity. For example, the >> flow could be following by keeping a saying hw_assert_status array for >> all virtual GSIs: (take vioapic for example) > >Ah, okay, so no polarity switching at all. Basically use VIOAPIC EOI as a >hint to tentatively drop the virtual wire to LOW, and only then ->end the >physical interrupt. I guess this is pretty much what you already >implement >in your VT-d patches? > >It'd be interesting to know how these two approaches compare >performance-wise. I suppose yours should win, really, due to fewer >physical >interrupts. > >If this is how your current VT-d patches handle interrupts then I don't see >why ioapic_ack=new is not working for you. That's a bit weird. I guess I >could read the patches some more. ;-) > > -- Keir Oh, I'm not the author of VT-d patches which is the credit of Allen and Xiaohui. :-) I just had the concrete thought along with the discussion with you, and will talk to them for confirmation tomorrow. I guess "ioapic_ack=new" should be just some manual bug since one NIC assignment shouldn't result shared interrupt case yet. Thanks, Kevin _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |