From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] KVM: Split IOAPIC structure
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:27:21 -0200
Message-ID: <20090108152721.GA5391@amt.cnet>
References: <1231411535-2461-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> <1231411535-2461-7-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:53123 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751178AbZAHP1a (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:27:30 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1231411535-2461-7-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 06:45:34PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
> Prepared for reuse ioapic_redir_entry for MSI.

What is the disadvantage of dispatching the MSI interrupts to the vcpus
via the IOAPIC? Pin shortage I can think of, but adding more IOAPIC's is
possible (and wanted anyway for systems with insane amounts of net/block
devices).

That would avoid code duplication (might need to handle a few msi
specific bits).