Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:43:35 +0300 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/1] uio_pci_generic: extensions to allow access for non-privileged processes |
| |
On 04/01/2010 10:24 PM, Tom Lyon wrote: > >> But there are multiple msi-x interrupts, how do you know which one >> triggered? >> > You don't. This would suck for KVM, I guess, but we'd need major rework of the > generic UIO stuff to have a separate event channel for each MSI-X. >
Doesn't it suck for non-kvm in the same way? Multiple vectors are there for a reason. For example, if you have a multiqueue NIC, you'd have to process all queues instead of just the one that triggered.
> For my purposes, collapsing all the MSI-Xs into one MSI-look-alike is fine, > because I'd be using MSI anyways if I could. The weird Intel 82599 VF only > supports MSI-X. > > So one big question is - do we expand the whole UIO framework for KVM > requirements, or do we split off either KVM or non-VM into a separate driver? > Hans or Greg - care to opine? >
Currently kvm does device assignment with its own code, I'd like to unify it with uio, not split it off.
Separate notifications for msi-x interrupts are just as useful for uio as they are for kvm.
-- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |