On 5/20/09, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:21:01PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > On 5/20/09, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> 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 <m...@redhat.com>
> >
> > 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.
> > For example, irq.c could support opaque packet payload of
> > unspecified/predefined size. MSI packet structure should be defined
> > in ioapic.c.
>
>
> Note that MSI does not have packets and MSI interrupts do not pass any
> payload.
I don't know too much about MSI, what's the 'data' field in msi_state then?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
