[EXTERNAL] Re: [RFC 1/1] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Add irq domain and chip for Direct LPI without ITS
Marc Zyngier
maz at kernel.org
Thu Aug 5 01:35:17 PDT 2021
On Wed, 04 Aug 2021 21:10:43 +0100,
Sunil Muthuswamy <sunilmut at microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Marc and Robin for clarifying. I see and understand the point
> about having explicit MSI mappings in the firmware specification for
> Direct LPIs for generic hardware support.
>
> Hey Mark
I assume this is for me?
> would you be willing to consider a scoped down implementation of GIC
> Direct LPI with just an IRQ chip implementation and no Direct LPI
> PCI-MSI IRQ chip.
Could you please clarify? If you are not implementing MSIs, how can a
device signal LPIs? At the end of the day, something has to write into
the RD, and it isn't going to happen by sheer magic.
> This will allow a MSI provider (such as Hyper-V vPCI) to provide a
> PCI-MSI IRQ chip on top of the Direct LPI IRQ chip and enable
> PCI-MSI scenarios, and avoid building in assumptions in other cases
> (like PCI) where firmware specification is not available.
I really don't get what you are suggesting. Could you please describe
what you have in mind?
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list