From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] KVM: VMX: Add Posted Interrupt supporting
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:49:27 -0300
Message-ID: <20130225124927.GA2057@amt.cnet>
References: <20130223194214.GD25155@redhat.com>
 <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E099BB540@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20130224141917.GC4284@redhat.com>
 <20130224180857.GA10477@amt.cnet>
 <CAEbWaiqodRXAa89WmeSvj0c2k-hKS7hwhSTTE_roUq2zqCNVOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E099BBBBF@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20130225110159.GA12299@redhat.com>
 <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E099BBE8E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20130225110702.GA12726@redhat.com>
 <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E099BBEE3@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, Avi Kivity <avi.kivity@gmail.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@intel.com>
To: "Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22080 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755058Ab3BYMtj (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 25 Feb 2013 07:49:39 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E099BBEE3@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:13:25AM +0000, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> Gleb Natapov wrote on 2013-02-25:
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:04:25AM +0000, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> >> Gleb Natapov wrote on 2013-02-25:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 08:42:52AM +0000, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> >>>> Avi Kivity wrote on 2013-02-25:
> >>>>> I didn't really follow, but is the root cause the need to keep track
> >>>>> of interrupt coalescing?  If so we can recommend that users use
> >>>>> KVM_IRQ_LINE when coalescing is unneeded, and move interrupt
> >>>>> injection with irq coalescing support to vcpu context.
> >>>> So we can hide the capability KVM_CAP_IRQ_INJECT_STATUS when posted
> >>> interrupt is enabled to force users doesn't to use
> >>> KVM_IRQ_LINE_STATUS. Does this acceptable?
> >>>> 
> >>>> The only case in KVM that need to know the interrupt injection status is
> > vlapic
> >>> timer. But since vlapic timer and vcpu are always in same pcpu, so there is no
> >>> problem.
> >>>> 
> >>> Not really. The primary user of this interface is RTC interrupt
> >>> re-injection for Windows guests.
> >> So without KVM_IRQ_LINE_STATUS capability, RTC cannot work well?
> >> 
> > Windows guests may experience timedrift under CPU overcommit scenario.
> Ok, I see. Seems we are stuck. :(
> Do you have any suggestion to solve or workaround current problem?

Depend on knowledge about atomicity (item 5 IIRC) of the sequence 
in the manual.