From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753382AbbF2JWv (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 05:22:51 -0400 Received: from 8bytes.org ([81.169.241.247]:35425 "EHLO theia.8bytes.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752031AbbF2JWn (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 05:22:43 -0400 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:22:41 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: "Wu, Feng" Cc: Alex Williamson , Eric Auger , Avi Kivity , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "mtosatti@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [v4 08/16] KVM: kvm-vfio: User API for IRQ forwarding Message-ID: <20150629092241.GI18569@8bytes.org> References: <1434135815.4927.308.camel@redhat.com> <557EFA7F.9010209@linaro.org> <1434386702.4927.391.camel@redhat.com> <1434657848.3700.83.camel@redhat.com> <20150624154616.GB18569@8bytes.org> <1435245112.3700.365.camel@redhat.com> <20150629090629.GH18569@8bytes.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 09:14:54AM +0000, Wu, Feng wrote: > Do you mean updating the hardware IRTEs for all the entries in the irq > routing table, no matter whether it is the updated one? Right, that's what I mean. It seems wrong to me to work around the API interface by creating a diff between the old and the new routing table. It is much simpler (and easier to maintain) to just update the IRTE and PI structures for all IRQs in the routing table, especially since this is not a hot-path. Joerg