| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-ia64-devel
RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] IOSAPIC virtualisation
Tristan Gingold wrote:
> Yes I have just copied from the original code.
> However, we should also take IPI into consideration (unless we go
> directly to event channel).
Can you explain more on IPI stuff? I am not in the context.
>> Anyway, keep the capability that a machine IRQ
>> may be bound to multiple guest like X86 did today is better and it
>> is not so difficult. you may also be able to reuse some code there
>> :-)
> To be added on my TODO list, since we can't trigger such a case or
> test it now.
Mmm, I would suggest we come out a full solution and hold this patch for
a while. Your previous patch let hypervisor own IOAPIC, but it is still
not "Xen" solution. Sharing physical IRQ by mulitple driver domain is a
normal case for level triggered IRQ. To be more important, the X86
solution to handle physical IRQ is pretty clean and beautiful, why not
resue the code?
Keir, please correct me if I made mistake in understanding the X86
IOAPIC virtualization policy.
Yes, we don't meet this situation now because driver domain is not there
yet, but are not we implementing this patch to solve future driver
domain issue?
If this is supported, then other issues like how to indicating the
ownership of IRQ disappear too.
Thx,eddie
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home