From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de. [2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a15si204958ilv.2.2021.12.01.14.03.04 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 01 Dec 2021 14:03:04 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [patch 21/32] NTB/msi: Convert to msi_on_each_desc() In-Reply-To: <45302c9d-f7a0-5a47-d0be-127d0dea45fb@intel.com> References: <20211126230957.239391799@linutronix.de> <20211126232735.547996838@linutronix.de> <7daba0e2-73a3-4980-c3a5-a71f6b597b22@deltatee.com> <874k7ueldt.ffs@tglx> <6ba084d6-2b26-7c86-4526-8fcd3d921dfd@deltatee.com> <87ilwacwp8.ffs@tglx> <87v909bf2k.ffs@tglx> <20211130202800.GE4670@nvidia.com> <87o861banv.ffs@tglx> <20211201001748.GF4670@nvidia.com> <87mtlkaauo.ffs@tglx> <8c2262ba-173e-0007-bc4c-94ec54b2847d@intel.com> <87pmqg88xq.ffs@tglx> <87k0go8432.ffs@tglx> <878rx480fk.ffs@tglx> <45302c9d-f7a0-5a47-d0be-127d0dea45fb@intel.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 23:03:02 +0100 Message-ID: <875ys87zl5.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain To: Dave Jiang , Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Logan Gunthorpe , LKML , Bjorn Helgaas , Marc Zygnier , Alex Williamson , Kevin Tian , Megha Dey , Ashok Raj , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jon Mason , Allen Hubbe , linux-ntb@googlegroups.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Christian Borntraeger , x86@kernel.org, Joerg Roedel , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org List-ID: On Wed, Dec 01 2021 at 14:49, Dave Jiang wrote: > On 12/1/2021 2:44 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> How that is backed on the host does not really matter. You can expose >> MSI-X to the guest with a INTx backing as well. >> >> I'm still failing to see the connection between the 9 MSIX vectors and >> the 2048 IMS vectors which I assume that this is the limitation of the >> physical device, right? > > I think I was confused with what you were asking and was thinking you > are saying why can't we just have MSIX on guest backed by the MSIX on > the physical device and thought there would not be enough vectors to > service the many guests. I think I understand what your position is now > with the clarification above. This still depends on how this overall discussion about representation of all of this stuff is resolved. >> What needs a subdevice to expose? Can you answer that too please? Thanks, tglx