From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:42347) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RFnX7-0002GQ-HN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:47:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RFnX6-0007fI-Gs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:47:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39700) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RFnX6-0007fB-8N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:47:12 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:48:14 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20111017134814.GE6406@redhat.com> References: <4E9C09E7.2010106@redhat.com> <4E9C0E6C.2070809@siemens.com> <20111017134135.GC6406@redhat.com> <4E9C3098.4080804@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E9C3098.4080804@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 11/45] msi: Factor out delivery hook List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Jan Kiszka , Alex Williamson , Marcelo Tosatti , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 03:41:44PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 10/17/2011 03:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 01:15:56PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > On 2011-10-17 12:56, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > On 10/17/2011 11:27 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > >> So far we deliver MSI messages by writing them into the target MMIO > > > >> area. This reflects what happens on hardware, but imposes some > > > >> limitations on the emulation when introducing KVM in-kernel irqchip > > > >> models. For those we will need to track the message origin. > > > > > > > > Why do we need to track the message origin? Emulated interrupt remapping? > > > > > > The origin holds the routing cache which we need to track if the message > > > already has a route (and that without searching long lists) and to > > > update that route instead of add another one. > > > > Hmm, yes, but if the device does stl_phys or something like this, > > it won't work with irqchip, will it? And it should, ideally. > > Why not? it will fall back to the apic path, and use the local routing > cache entry there. Does it still work with irqchip enabled? I didn't realize ... > -- > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function