[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] lsapic deliver external IRQ


  • To: "Magenheimer, Dan \(HP Labs Fort Collins\)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>, <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:55:52 +0800
  • Cc: ipf-xen <ipf-xen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 03 May 2005 06:55:33 +0000
  • List-id: DIscussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcVNWmsE03s0PVd0RSGIR7DeS8HlZwApJXCgAA+89RAAFgPrQAAD3ctwAAT+oQAAPMwaIA==
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel] lsapic deliver external IRQ

Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:
> The pending_interruption flag is critical for paravirtualized
> guests as it avoids many unnecessary privops/hypercalls when
> enabling interrupts.  Most of the time, when the rsm instruction
> is executed, there are no pending interrupts for the guest,
> so the paravirtualization of rsm psr.i in the current implementation
> is:
> 
>  tmp = shared_page.interrupt_enabled.
>  shared_page.interrupt_enabled = 1
>  if (!tmp && shared_page.pending_interruption) rsm psr.i***
A little bit confuse, is this for ssm psr.i or rsm psr.i?
Anyway, understand the situation. OK we can set this special flag when
there are pending IRQs.
> 
> *** or perhaps in a later implementation, do a (fast) hypercall
> 
> If your patch preserves this (or handles it better), yes,
> I would like to see it (though it may be better to submit
> it separate from the rest of the VT code so it can be
> reviewed easier).
> 
Eddie

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.