From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: Emulate MSI-X table in kernel
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 17:18:58 -0300
Message-ID: <20110301201858.GA8368@amt.cnet>
References: <1298541065-21343-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com>
 <1298541065-21343-4-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com>
 <20110224104508.GE6895@redhat.com>
 <201102251428.02261.sheng@linux.intel.com>
 <20110225082938.GB17290@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4033 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1757370Ab1CAUhk (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 1 Mar 2011 15:37:40 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110225082938.GB17290@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:29:38AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 02:28:02PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > On Thursday 24 February 2011 18:45:08 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 05:51:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > > > Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Doesn't look like all comments got addressed.
> > > E.g. gpa_t entry_base is still there and in reality
> > > you said it's a host virtual address so
> > > should be void __user *;
> > 
> > Would update it.
> > 
> > > And ENOTSYNC meaning 'MSIX' is pretty hacky.
> > 
> > I'd like to discuss it later. We may need some work on all MMIO handling side to 
> > make it more straightforward. But I don't want to bundle it with this one... 
> 
> It's not PCI related so I'll defer to Avi/Marcelo on this.
> Are you guys happy with the ENOTSYNC meaning 'MSIX'

What would be a better alternative to ENOTSYNC? Can't see any.

> and userspace_exit_needed hacks in this code?

I thought this was handled by mmio_needed in a previous patch? 

Since x86_emulate_instruction does

        } else if (vcpu->mmio_needed) {
                if (vcpu->mmio_is_write)
                        vcpu->mmio_needed = 0;
                r = EMULATE_DO_MMIO;

It should be fine. Sheng why did you introduce userspace_exit_needed?