[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [VTD][PATCH] a time out mechanism for the shared interrupt issue for vtd
- To: "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 09:41:18 +0100
- Delivery-date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:37:12 -0700
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
- Thread-index: AcgDM6YXZtsocIrGTGOzXvN/jWZJjAACgUaC
- Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [VTD][PATCH] a time out mechanism for the shared interrupt issue for vtd
Why does the irq_lock need to be released before taking the desc->lock in pirq_guest_eoi()? What does the new return boolean from hvm_pci_intx_assert() mean?
-- Keir
On 30/9/07 08:29, "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Attached is a patch for shared interrupt between dom0 and HVM domain for vtd.
Most of problem is caused by that we should inject interrupt to both domains and the
physical interrupt deassertion then may be delayed by the device assigned to the HVM.
The patch adds a timer, and the time out value is sufficient large to tolerant
the delaying used to wait for the physical interrupt deassertion.
The patch works well with the situation that SATA disk shares interrupt with PCIe NIC.
And for vtd=1, the ioapic_ack=new method also works well.
Signed-off-by: Xin, Xiaohui<xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
