From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] KVM: assigned dev: MSI-X mask support Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 10:03:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20101115080353.GD22248@redhat.com> References: <1289461620-7055-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> <201011151537.22023.sheng@linux.intel.com> <20101115074250.GA22248@redhat.com> <201011151548.46490.sheng@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Sheng Yang Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17688 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757621Ab0KOIEG (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 03:04:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201011151548.46490.sheng@linux.intel.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:48:46PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > On Monday 15 November 2010 15:42:50 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:37:21PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > > > > > We can back to them if there is someone really did it in that way. > > > > > But for all hypervisors using QEmu, I think we haven't seen such > > > > > kind of behavior yet. > > > > > > > > I would rather stick to the spec than go figure out what do BSD/Sun/Mac > > > > do, or will do. > > > > > > Sure, but no hurry for that. It doesn't similar to the API case, so we > > > can achieve it incrementally. > > > > Isn't the proposed way to solve this to move vector address/data > > handling into kernel too? If yes it does affect the API. > > It didn't afffect the API used by this patch. So the code can still be modified > after later. Then won't we have to support two APIs, forever? > -- > regards > Yang, Sheng