From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754877Ab0IPNuo (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:50:44 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60084 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752601Ab0IPNun (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:50:43 -0400 Message-ID: <4C9220A9.4070508@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:50:33 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100907 Fedora/3.1.3-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" CC: Gleb Natapov , Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] kvm: enable irq injection from interrupt context References: <20100916101339.GK20864@redhat.com> <20100916102047.GY3008@redhat.com> <20100916104455.GA22254@redhat.com> <20100916105403.GZ3008@redhat.com> <20100916105352.GB22254@redhat.com> <20100916111752.GA3008@redhat.com> <20100916121338.GA23779@redhat.com> <20100916123301.GE3008@redhat.com> <20100916125717.GA24284@redhat.com> <4C921823.5080602@redhat.com> <20100916133828.GA24850@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20100916133828.GA24850@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/16/2010 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > That's just an implementation detail. Devices either assert INT# or > > they do not. Tying the wires together constitutes an AND gate. > > This gate has to be modelled somewhere, currently it's in qemu's pci > > emulation. > > Right. kvm in kernel has this as well, we need to keep this in > kvm kernel if we want to support level with irqfd. Right, we added the irq_source_id hack for device assignment. What's wrong with letting userspace mediate this, though? > Where it does not belong is individual devices: these > should be able to assert INTx multiple times > and it should have no effect, as per spec. > > Yes. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function