lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH 05/13] KVM: Update IRTE according to guest interrupt configuration changes
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:pbonzini@redhat.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 5:14 PM
> To: Zhang, Yang Z; Wu, Feng; Alex Williamson
> Cc: gleb@kernel.org; dwmw2@infradead.org; joro@8bytes.org;
> tglx@linutronix.de; mingo@redhat.com; hpa@zytor.com; x86@kernel.org;
> kvm@vger.kernel.org; iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] KVM: Update IRTE according to guest interrupt
> configuration changes
>
>
>
> On 12/11/2014 04:42, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > Personally, I think this feature will be helpful to the legacy device
> > assignment. Agree, vfio is the right solution for future feature
> > enabling. But the old kvm without the good vfio supporting is still
> > used largely today. The user really looking for this feature but they
> > will not upgrade their kernel. It's easy for us to backport this
> > feature to old kvm with the legacy device assignment, but it is
> > impossible to backport the whole vfio.
>
> You can certainly backport these patches to distros that do not have
> VFIO. But upstream we should work on VFIO first. VFIO has feature
> parity with legacy device assignment, and adding a new feature that is
> not in VFIO would be a bad idea.
>
> By the way, do you have benchmark results for it? We have not been able
> to see any performance improvement for APICv on e.g. netperf.

Do you mean benchmark results for APICv itself or VT-d Posted-Interrtups?

Thanks,
Feng

>
> Paolo
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-12 11:01    [W:0.061 / U:6.640 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site