Re: [PATCH 2/4] kvm: Add missing KVM_IRQFD API documentation

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 04:15:50PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
>  Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt |   17 +++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> index 310fe50..9b4cb2b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> @@ -1965,6 +1965,23 @@ return the hash table order in the parameter.  (If the guest is using
>  the virtualized real-mode area (VRMA) facility, the kernel will
>  re-create the VMRA HPTEs on the next KVM_RUN of any vcpu.)
>  
> +4.76 KVM_IRQFD
> +
> +Capability: KVM_CAP_IRQFD
> +Architectures: x86
> +Type: vm ioctl
> +Parameters: struct kvm_irqfd (in)
> +Returns: 0 on success, -1 on error
> +
> +Allows setting an eventfd to directly trigger a guest interrupt
> +kvm_irqfd.fd specifies the file descriptor to use as the eventfd and
> +kvm_irqfd.gsi specifies the irqchip pin toggled by this event.  By
> +default this interface only supports edge triggered interrupts,
> +meaning the specified gsi is asserted and immediately de-asserted
> +when the eventfd is triggered.

That's a bit confusing. This assert/deassert only has effect for level.
Do we or do we not want to maintain this assert/deassert behaviour
for level irqfds? If yes we shouldn't say it's unsupported if
no we should not document it.

Gleb, Avi, any thoughts?

>  Specifying KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_DEASSIGN
> +removes the previously set irqfd matching both kvm_irqfd.fd and
> +kvm_irqfd.gsi.
> +
>  
>  5. The kvm_run structure
>  ------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/