Re: Mask bit support's API

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 04:06:20PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >>
> >>  So instead of
> >>
> >>  - guest reads/writes msix
> >>  - kvm filters mmio, implements some, passes others to userspace
> >>
> >>  we have
> >>
> >>  - guest reads/writes msix
> >>  - kvm implements all
> >>  - some writes generate an additional notification to userspace
> >
> >I suppose we don't need to generate notification to userspace? Because every
> >read/write is handled by kernel, and userspace just need interface to kernel to
> >get/set the entry - and well, does userspace need to do it when kernel can handle
> >all of them? Maybe not...
> 
> We could have the kernel handle addr/data writes by setting up an
> internal interrupt routing.  A disadvantage is that more work is
> needed if we emulator interrupt remapping in qemu.

As an alternative, interrupt remapping will need some API rework, right?
Existing APIs only pass address/data for msi.

-- 
MST