From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] create a single workqueue for each vm to update
 vm irq routing table
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:28:23 +0100
Message-ID: <5294CC27.4090202@redhat.com>
References: <D3E216785288A145B7BC975F83A2ED10448ADCCB@SZXEMA510-MBS.china.huawei.com> <52949847.6020908@redhat.com> <CAEbWaipAnmoa=gMbB1aNb=btU6LgYXhcnmQWHJ_89m4yvw6Dug@mail.gmail.com> <5294A68F.6060301@redhat.com> <CAF950W+-UiX6xv4vYmnxji9aWDU8ds2rnx7JugnbHQWJdCCD-Q@mail.gmail.com> <5294B461.5000405@redhat.com> <5294B634.4050801@cloudius-systems.com> <20131126150357.GA20352@redhat.com> <5294BC3B.6070902@redhat.com> <20131126162414.GC20352@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@cloudius-systems.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi.kivity@gmail.com>,
	"Huangweidong (C)" <weidong.huang@huawei.com>,
	KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	"Jinxin (F)" <jinxin712@huawei.com>,
	"Zhanghaoyu (A)" <haoyu.zhang@huawei.com>,
	Luonengjun <luonengjun@huawei.com>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Zanghongyong <zanghongyong@huawei.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36232 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1757183Ab3KZQ2g (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:28:36 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20131126162414.GC20352@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Il 26/11/2013 17:24, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
>>     VCPU writes to routing table
>>                                        e = entry from IRQ routing table
>>     kvm_irq_routing_update(kvm, new);
>>     VCPU resumes execution
>>                                        kvm_set_msi_irq(e, &irq);
>>                                        kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic_fast();
>> 
>> where the entry is stale but the VCPU has already resumed execution.
> 
> So how is it different from what we have now:
> 
> disable_irq()
> VCPU writes to routing table
>                                  e = entry from IRQ routing table
>                                  kvm_set_msi_irq(e, &irq);
>                                  kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic_fast();
> kvm_irq_routing_update(kvm, new);
> synchronize_rcu()
> VCPU resumes execution
> enable_irq()
> receive stale irq

Adding a "disable/enable IRQs" looks like a relatively big change.  But
perhaps it's not for some reason I'm missing.

Paolo