Xen project Mailing List

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVM] fix PCI interrupt routing via ACPI

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

From: "Dave Lively" <dave.lively@xxxxxxxxx>

Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:45:02 -0400

Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Wang, Winston L" <winston.l.wang@xxxxxxxxx>

Delivery-date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 09:45:36 -0700

Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=CHi+LHogQ4co4+emeNhzZoKSE1H/0Oue1fW3WslHuIVHZukJ3kgXpqBUwSZLh/t3lNPeBgMyuCNY4/cbh5V6ugJrSeYrqWpBYF+7KQQjkinJe5hVAOrzGPKpJe4LMK/IDlYEabADtZBi62UCt7rO0+jA+SQWkn+v4ZFvn8UgMWo=

List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

On 10/17/06, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 17/10/06 14:26, "Dave Lively" <dave.lively@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm all for sidestepping the problem when that works.  But I worry
> that the requirement
> of supporting PIC mode means we need this general functionality (i.e.,
> PCI interrupt
> routing) anyway.  Since there will be no performance advantage in
> hiding this functionality
> in APIC mode, perhaps we're better off just leaving it there.

I don't believe that PIC mode requires us to support interrupt routing.

 -- Keir

Sorry, I shouldn't have said "requirement" ... I agree it's not known to be necessary (and suspect it's truly not). Would you agree it's *desirable* for PIC mode guests? Otherwise they have to live with the default PCI IRQ assignments, which may lead to unnecessary IRQ sharing. But I'm not sure how much of a problem this is in practice (i.e., since the QEMU configs we use are constrained anyway). If we didn't already have a working PCI interrupt router, I wouldn't be proposing that we implement one (without further evidence that it helps performance). But given that we have one already that works, we might as well use it for PIC mode guests, at least. APIC mode guests are a different question. Once QEMU can raise IRQs > 15, we can either extend the interrupt router to assign IRQs > 15, or we can hide the interrupt router entirely as you suggest. I still suspect the former is easier. But we don't need to resolve this issue now. Dave _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

©2013 Xen Project, A Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. All Rights Reserved.
Linux Foundation is a registered trademark of The Linux Foundation.
Xen Project is a trademark of The Linux Foundation.