From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] kvm: level irqfd and new eoifd Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:53:14 +0300 Message-ID: <4FFD4D0A.2000202@redhat.com> References: <20120703191106.6735.78272.stgit@bling.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mst@redhat.com, gleb@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jan.kiszka@siemens.com To: Alex Williamson Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120703191106.6735.78272.stgit@bling.home> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 07/03/2012 10:21 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > Here's the latest iteration of adding an interface to assert and > de-assert level interrupts from external drivers like vfio. These > apply on top of the previous argument cleanup, documentation, and > sanitization patches for irqfd. It would be great to get this queued > in next for linux 3.6. > > I believe I've addressed all the previous comments, including fixing > the locking problems in eoifd. I've run this with lockdep adding > and removing level irqfd/eoifd pairs without any problems. Please > let me know if there are any further comments. Thanks, Is there any performance justification for level irqfd? Don't all new/high bandwidth devices support msi, and this is just a legacy path? eoifd does add new functionality (which parallels the existing ack notifier usage in kvm device assignment); it's not just an optimization. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function