From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH] interrupt preemption support Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:21:27 +0200 Message-ID: <45FE9C67.4060703@qumranet.com> References: <45F97019.BA47.005A.0@novell.com> <45FA414C.1040703@qumranet.com> <45FA4489.BA47.005A.0@novell.com> <45FCD226.2010603@qumranet.com> <45FE4FB1.BA47.005A.0@novell.com> <45FE9793.3060204@qumranet.com> <45FE9827.5030200@qumranet.com> <45FE5346.BA47.005A.0@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Gregory Haskins Return-path: In-Reply-To: <45FE5346.BA47.005A.0-Et1tbQHTxzrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Gregory Haskins wrote: >> Note that as long as the apic code is in userspace, the sending side is >> also in userspace, so all the IPI related stuff doesn't touch the kernel. >> > > > I see. So really the entire approach I took (against the kernel code) is wrong, and I should focus on the QEMU side? > Well, eventually we do want to have the apic in the kernel, and we do want inexpensive inter-vcpu (and driver->vcpu) interrupts. But it seems that the simplest way to get things going is in qemu. Note that it's not enough; there's the mmu to harden for smp and basic support for creating > 1 vcpus. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV