-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
DO_NOT_MERGE: a draft design for interrupt management #6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
P.S. you can create a draft PR. The draft PR cannot be merged. Check it out here: https://github.blog/2019-02-14-introducing-draft-pull-requests/ |
sboeuf
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jiangliu proposal looks good.
| //! | ||
| //! The overall flow to deal with interrupts is: | ||
| //! * the VMM creates an interrupt manager | ||
| //! * the VMM creates a device manager, passing on an reference to the interrupt manager |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For the sake of API simplicity, should we have the device manager creation API implicitly create the interrupt manager?
Do you need access to the interrupt manager from the VMM itself?
|
Sure, I will address comments and then create a formal PR. |
This PR is a draft for interrupt management, which aims to decouple the vm-allocator crate from the vm-device crate.
@sboeuf @liujing2 @sameo @andreeaflorescu Please help to take a look at the proposal:)