Re: [Xen-devel] [VTD][patch 0/5] HVM device assignment using vt-d

[Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 31/5/07 14:59, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> But... still one question, seems that current Xen doesn't allow
> multiple end() methods called for one physical interrupt instance,
> while a new physical interrupt will happen only as result of end()
> (EOI for ioapic_new, and unmask RTE for ioapic_old). See below
> case:

Yeah, well I haven't looked at how the Neocleus patches actually deal with
this, but I expect they might steal hvm-bound physical irqs completely, hook
them off early in do_IRQ() and have bespoke code to deal with them. Possibly
it could be integrated with existing ->ack and ->end methods, actually.
->end() would be no-op while ->ack() would switch polarity in the IOAPIC and
then EOI the LAPIC. Then the handler function called by do_IRQ() would
toggle virtual HVM wires.

Anyhow, integrating with existing Xen IRQ handling subsystem clearly isn't a
rocket-science problem. :-)

 -- Keir


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