[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH v16 6/6] hw/vfio/platform: add irqfd supp
From: |
Alex Williamson |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH v16 6/6] hw/vfio/platform: add irqfd support |
Date: |
Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:46:45 -0600 |
On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 18:31 +0200, Eric Auger wrote:
> On 06/26/2015 06:26 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 26/06/2015 18:21, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM
> >>>> + if (kvm_irqfds_enabled() && kvm_resamplefds_enabled() &&
> >>>> + vdev->irqfd_allowed) {
> >>>> + sbc->connect_irq_notifier = vfio_start_irqfd_injection;
> >> Should we be abstracting this to a
> >> sysbus_register_connect_irq_notifier()? It seems a littler personal to
> >> be reaching in and setting it ourselves and would avoid us needing to
> >> reference the class.
> >
> > It's your class, so it's not too bad to touch it from that point of
> > view; on the other hand it's ugly to do it here nevertheless. :)
> >
> > I think you should always set "sbc->connect_irq_notifier =
> > vfio_start_irqfd_injection" in the class_init function. The
> > vfio_start_irqfd_injection function can just exit if it finds
> > "!kvm_enabled() || !kvm_irqfds_enabled() || !kvm_resamplefds_enabled()
> > || !vdev->irqfd_allowed".
> OK thanks for the guidance. Alex, are you OK with that solution. It
> avoids touching the other patch
Yeah, I'm ok with that, it's less awkward from the class_init. Thanks,
Alex
- [Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH v16 4/6] intc: arm_gic_kvm: set the qemu_irq/gsi mapping, (continued)
[Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH v16 5/6] sysbus: add irq_routing_notifier, Eric Auger, 2015/06/15
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH v16 0/6] KVM platform device passthrough, Eric Auger, 2015/06/22
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH v16 0/6] KVM platform device passthrough, Paolo Bonzini, 2015/06/24