Fwd: [PATCH v4 08/18] cxl: IRQ allocation for guests
Frederic Barrat
fbarrat at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Tue Feb 23 01:46:52 AEDT 2016
Le 21/02/2016 23:30, Manoj Kumar a écrit :
>> Subject: [PATCH v4 08/18] cxl: IRQ allocation for guests
>> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:39:01 +0100
>> From: Frederic Barrat <fbarrat at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> To: imunsie at au1.ibm.com, michael.neuling at au1.ibm.com,
>> mpe at ellerman.id.au, linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
>>
>> The PSL interrupt is not going to be multiplexed in a guest, so an
>> interrupt will be allocated for it for each context.
>
> Not clear why this is the case. Why cannot the CXL later still
> multiplex this in a guest? Is this a design choice, an
> architectural issue, or the complexity of implementation did
> not warrant this? From an API perspective it would have been
> preferable to not cascade this change down to all consumers,
> and have consumers aware whether they are working in a
> bare-metal or a guest environment.
It was a design choice made by pHyp. We cannot multiplex the PSL
interrupt with the current pHyp implementation.
But it doesn't affect the API: the behavior of the API specifying the
number of interrupts for a context is consistent: the driver always
expects the number of AFU interrupts on bare-metal and in a LPAR. The
PSL interrupt is never included.
You can see a difference in the maximum number of attachable contexts
between bare-metal and powerVM (if the limiting factor is the number of
available interrupts). But there's no guarantee for that at the API level.
Fred
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list