On 10/17/2011 01:19 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > IMO this needlessly leaks kvm information into core qemu. The cache > > should be completely hidden in kvm code. > > > > I think msi_deliver() can hide the use of the cache completely. For > > pre-registered events like kvm's irqfd, you can use something like > > > > qemu_irq qemu_msi_irq(MSIMessage msg) > > > > for non-kvm, it simply returns a qemu_irq that triggers a stl_phys(); > > for kvm, it allocates an irqfd and a permanent entry in the cache and > > returns a qemu_irq that triggers the irqfd. > > See my previously mail: you want to track the life-cycle of an MSI > source to avoid generating routes for identical sources. A messages is > not a source. Two identical messages can come from different sources. So > we need a separate data structure for that purpose. >
Yes, I understand this now. Just to make sure I understand this completely: a hash table indexed by MSIMessage in kvm code would avoid this? You'd just allocate on demand when seeing a new MSIMessage and free on an LRU basis, avoiding pinned entries. I'm not advocating this (yet), just want to understand the tradeoffs. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
