DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2006-02
[
Date Prev][
Date Next]
[
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Re: MSI prototype
Matt -
Thanks for the feedback. More questions and a couple of answers below
On 2/21/06, Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
. .
> I think (3) isn't a big deal if the MSI irq abstraction is given
> the 'number of vectors' required and returns just the base vector,
> letting the driver do base+0, base+1, base+2 for the individual
> vectors. One resource would thus represent all N requested contiguous
> IRQs.
That sounds fine for MSI, but how do you handle MSI-X which doesn't
have the same restriction for contiguous vectors? I can easily imagine
having a fragmented vector space in which there are enough available
vectors to satisfy a MSI-X request, but none of the vectors are
contiguous so the allocation fails. This would defeat one of the big
advantages of MSI-X over MSI. So I'm suspicious that we would still
want multiple interrupt resources.
> Reservation and allocation can be solved by removing the software
> limits on the number of supported IRQs. In 1.4 I separated out the
I'm not totally sure I follow how this fixes the problem, so let me
ask a follow up question. Are you thinking that the bus driver would
pre-assign all the vectors each device can use? I can imagine this
being one approach to (1), but does this fix (2) as well?
. ..
> My understanding of MSI(X) is that it basically treats the interrupt
> as edge-triggered. On trigger it writes the specified data to the
Yup
> specified address which, I assume, would be an IOAPIC or LAPIC address?
LAPIC (0xfee00000 + 0xXXX)
> I can't imagine how it would work with an IOAPIC with its stupid
> register window crap, so I assume the MSI(X) address and data would
> inject an ICR command into the LAPIC. I don't quite understand how
> the device is able to do that without polling the 'S'end Pending
> bit in the ICR, though.
My guess is that the memory controller clues the processor into what
is happening out-of-band. Since all the messages are written to
essentially the same address, the memory controller decodes this
address as an interrupt (vs a normal memory access) and passes the 16
bit data (which includes the vector) to the processor.
---chuck
[
Date Prev][
Date Next]
[
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index]