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

["Guy Zana" <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tian, Kevin [mailto:kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:04 PM
> To: Tian, Kevin; Keir Fraser; Guy Zana; Kay, Allen M; 
> xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [VTD][patch 0/5] HVM device 
> assignment using vt-d
> 
> >From: Tian, Kevin
> >Sent: 2007年5月31日 23:59
> >
> >>From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>Sent: 2007年5月31日 23:52
> >>
> >>On 31/5/07 16:40, "Keir Fraser" <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It'd be interesting to know how these two approaches compare 
> >>> performance-wise. I suppose yours should win, really, due to fewer
> >>physical
> >>> interrupts.
> >>
> >>One thing is that the polarity-switching approach is a 
> slightly better 
> >>fit with the HVM interrupt logic. Currently interrupt sources and 
> >>VIOAPIC are not tightly bound together; they only interact by one 
> >>waggling the virtual intx wires and the other sampling that wire 
> >>periodically (or
> >synchronously
> >>on +ve edges). Your approach requires a 'back channel' from the 
> >>VIOAPIC code back to physical interrupt code to call ->end(). It's 
> >>kind of ugly. On the other hand I suspect the 
> polarity-switching code 
> >>adds more stuff to the phsyical interrupt subsystem, and 
> your approach 
> >>can certainly be supported, probably by adding a bit more 
> state (maybe 
> >>just a single bit) per virtual intx wire. Really we need to look at 
> >>and measure each
> >implementation...
> >>
> >> -- Keir
> >
> >Agree to support both with a common infrastructure. But I doubt that 
> >polarity-switching code should also use such ->end call in 
> virtual EOI 
> >path, since you anyway need an unmask or EOI signal to 
> physical ioapic. 
> >Or else, how to trigger the 2nd interrupt at falling-edge?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Kevin
> 
> Oh, forgive my ignorance. That can be done in ->ack() by 
> changing polarity and then EOI as what you said before. :-)
> 

We did it by replacing the end() callback of the hw_interrupt_type, the new 
handler performs a change_vector_polarity and then calls the original ->end() 
of the level-triggered hw_interrupt_type, all the rest of the callbacks stays 
the same.

I hope to get the patch ready today, but it will be for c/s 15011.

Thanks,
Guy.

> Thanks,
> Kevin
> 

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