From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761577AbZFNNua (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2009 09:50:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754643AbZFNNuV (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2009 09:50:21 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:46167 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756675AbZFNNuT (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2009 09:50:19 -0400 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:50:08 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Avi Kivity Cc: Gregory Haskins , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davidel@xmailserver.org, mtosatti@redhat.com Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v10] kvm: add support for irqfd Message-ID: <20090614135008.GA12511@redhat.com> References: <20090520142234.22285.72274.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <20090614092542.GA4833@redhat.com> <4A34EFD9.7010303@novell.com> <20090614131937.GA10646@redhat.com> <4A34F9D8.5040306@redhat.com> <20090614133035.GD10646@redhat.com> <4A34FDBB.9090100@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A34FDBB.9090100@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 04:40:11PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > >>> I don't want to assume that the eventfds all come from the same source. >>> >>> That said, we have a workaround, allocate a new gsi with the same >>> routes and attach the excess eventfds there. >>> >> >> Right. So you are ok with 1:1 irqfd:gsi requirement for now? >> This seems nicer than N:1 with an arbitrary N > > Not too happy, but okay. Is the answer 42:1 then, as usual?