From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB17C433FF for ; Sun, 11 Aug 2019 07:20:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5936B2085B for ; Sun, 11 Aug 2019 07:20:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725810AbfHKHUh (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Aug 2019 03:20:37 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:58558 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725776AbfHKHUh (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Aug 2019 03:20:37 -0400 Received: from p200300ddd71876477e7a91fffec98e25.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:dd:d718:7647:7e7a:91ff:fec9:8e25]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1hwi9a-0005mZ-Hi; Sun, 11 Aug 2019 09:20:34 +0200 Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 09:20:29 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Marc Zyngier cc: Megha Dey , bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ashok.raj@intel.com, jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [RFC V1 RESEND 2/6] PCI/MSI: Dynamic allocation of MSI-X vectors by group In-Reply-To: <48a44ffc-4b5b-5eef-73de-020f1710c41e@arm.com> Message-ID: References: <1561162778-12669-1-git-send-email-megha.dey@linux.intel.com> <1561162778-12669-3-git-send-email-megha.dey@linux.intel.com> <1565118316.2401.112.camel@intel.com> <48a44ffc-4b5b-5eef-73de-020f1710c41e@arm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 7 Aug 2019, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 07/08/2019 14:56, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Aug 2019, Megha Dey wrote: > >> On Sat, 2019-06-29 at 09:59 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019, Megha Dey wrote: > >> > >> Totally agreed. The request to add a dynamic MSI-X infrastructure came > >> from some driver teams internally and currently they do not have > >> bandwidth to come up with relevant test cases. > > > > Hahahaha. > > > >> But we hope that this patch set could serve as a precursor to the > >> interrupt message store (IMS) patch set, and we can use this patch set > >> as the baseline for the IMS patches. > > > > If IMS needs the same functionality, then we need to think about it > > slightly differently because IMS is not necessarily tied to PCI. > > > > IMS has some similarity to the ARM GIC ITS stuff IIRC, which already > > provides these things outside of PCI. Marc? > > Indeed. We have MSI-like functionality almost everywhere, and make heavy > use of the generic MSI framework. Platform-MSI is probably the most > generic example we have (it's the Far West transposed to MSIs). > > > We probably need some generic infrastructure for this so PCI and everything > > else can use it. > > Indeed. Overall, I'd like the concept of MSI on whatever bus to have one > single behaviour across the board, as long as it makes sense for that > bus (nobody needs another PCI MultiMSI, for example). Right. @Intel: Is there documentation and perhaps early code for that IMS muck to look at? Thanks, tglx