qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu: msi irq allocation api


From: Blue Swirl
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu: msi irq allocation api
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 21:38:58 +0300

On 5/20/09, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:44:31PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
>  > On 5/20/09, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>  > > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:21:01PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
>  > >  > On 5/20/09, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>  > >  > > define api for allocating/setting up msi-x irqs, and for updating 
> them
>  > >  > >  with msi-x vector information, supply implementation in ioapic. 
> Please
>  > >  > >  comment on this API: I intend to port my msi-x patch to work on 
> top of
>  > >  > >  it.
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > >  Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden>
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Sparc64 also uses packets ("mondos", not implemented yet) for
>  > >  > interrupt vector data, there the packet size is 8 * 64 bits.
>  > >  > I think we should aim for a more generic API that covers this case 
> also.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Are you sure this is a good idea? MSI is tied to PCI, and PCI only has
>  > >  MSI, not "mondos". What code would benefit from this abstraction?
>  >
>  > Sparc64 emulation, of course. I think also the API would be neater.
>
>
> Since "mondos" are not interrupts, why use irqs for them?

I just said above that they are used for interrupt vector data. What
makes you think they are not interrupts?




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]