From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Fedin Subject: RE: IRQFD support with GICv3 ITS (WAS: RE: [PATCH 00/13] arm64: KVM: GICv3 ITS emulation) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 13:00:13 +0300 Message-ID: <014301d0a8e4$683db9f0$38b92dd0$@samsung.com> References: <042601d0a357$d3cec4d0$7b6c4e70$@samsung.com> <557842A0.9070503@linaro.org> <05da01d0a392$58bf5030$0a3df090$@samsung.com> <011601d0a8de$f75b8280$e6128780$@samsung.com> <55813F2A.9060102@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org To: 'Marc Zyngier' , 'Eric Auger' , 'Andre Przywara' , christoffer.dall@linaro.org Return-path: Received: from mailout4.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.14]:47706 "EHLO mailout4.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754397AbbFQKAR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2015 06:00:17 -0400 Received: from eucpsbgm2.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.245]) by mailout4.w1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5 2014)) with ESMTP id <0NQ300E3R2GF3110@mailout4.w1.samsung.com> for kvm@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2015 11:00:15 +0100 (BST) In-reply-to: <55813F2A.9060102@arm.com> Content-language: ru Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello! > Hmmm. You may not have noticed it, but we're actually all are quite busy > at the moment (hint, we're at -rc8, and the next merge window is about > to open). Ok ok, i do not mind of course. :) Just i expected at least some, quick reply. It's like talking to a person while he/she suddenly starts ignoring you and turns away without any ACK/NAK. I simply do not know what is wrong. > This feels just wrong. The LPI number is under complete control of the > guest, and can be changed at any time. You can never rely on it to be > stable. Heh... Then i'm afraid the only option is the second one: GSI routing. It would allow to associate an irqfd with MSI bunch (data + address + devID) as it is. I'm also currently busy with some strange vhost-net performance issues, so i'll make another RFC later, after i redo my implementation using routing. Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research center Russia