Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 01/14] xen/x86: remove XENFEAT_hvm_pirqs for PVHv2 guests

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 30.11.16 at 17:49, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- a/docs/misc/hvmlite.markdown
> +++ b/docs/misc/hvmlite.markdown
> @@ -75,3 +75,23 @@ info structure that's passed at boot time (field 
> rsdp_paddr).
>  
>  Description of paravirtualized devices will come from XenStore, just as it's
>  done for HVM guests.
> +
> +## Interrupts ##
> +
> +### Interrupts from physical devices ###
> +
> +Interrupts from physical devices are delivered using native methods, this is
> +done in order to take advantage of new hardware assisted virtualization
> +functions, like posted interrupts. This implies that PVHv2 guests with 
> physical
> +devices will also have the necessary interrupt controllers in order to manage
> +the delivery of interrupts from those devices, using the same interfaces that
> +are available on native hardware.

I continue to not really agree with this. For a while you can't assume
posted interrupts to be universally available. And iirc we still don't
enable their use by default in Xen. Hence I could see this to be the
preferred mechanism, but the event channel based mechanism may
want to remain an alternative, the more that ...

> +### Interrupts from paravirtualized devices ###
> +
> +Interrupts from paravirtualized devices are delivered using event channels, 
> see
> +[Event Channel Internals][event_channels] for more detailed information about
> +event channels. Delivery of those interrupts can be configured in the same 
> way
> +as HVM guests, check xen/include/public/hvm/params.h and
> +xen/include/public/hvm/hvm_op.h for more information about available delivery
> +methods.

... you still need them anyway.

Similarly I continue to be in disagreement with the blanket disabling
of all physdev ops.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel