From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 RFC 0/2] kvm: direct msix injection Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 11:39:08 +0300 Message-ID: <20120613083907.GA17320@redhat.com> References: <20120612230703.GE1973@amt.cnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kiszka To: Marcelo Tosatti Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1025 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751201Ab2FMIih (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2012 04:38:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120612230703.GE1973@amt.cnet> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 08:07:03PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:19:17PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > We can deliver certain interrupts, notably MSIX, > > from atomic context. > > Here's an untested patch to do this (compiled only). > > > > Changes from v2: > > Don't inject broadcast interrupts directly > > Changes from v1: > > Tried to address comments from v1, except unifying > > with kvm_set_irq: passing flags to it looks too ugly. > > Added a comment. > > > > Jan, you said you can test this? > > Looks fine to me (except the unlikely). Avi/Gleb? Which of the unlikely do you mean? Most of them cover the case where msix is a broadcast or where level is 0 for msi. This never triggered in my testing. So the unlikely seems justified. -- MST