Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 31/38] arm: gic.lock can be taken in interrupt context, so lock appropriately.

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, Ian Campbell wrote:
> In particular it is taken by gic_set_guest_irq which is called by
> vgic_vcpu_inject_irq
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  xen/arch/arm/gic.c |   20 ++++++++++----------
>  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c
> index a398f92..ededa99 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c
> @@ -329,19 +329,19 @@ int __init gic_init(void)
>  /* Set up the per-CPU parts of the GIC for a secondary CPU */
>  void __cpuinit gic_init_secondary_cpu(void)
>  {
> -    spin_lock(&gic.lock);
> +    spin_lock_irq(&gic.lock);
>      gic_cpu_init();
>      gic_hyp_init();
> -    spin_unlock(&gic.lock);
> +    spin_unlock_irq(&gic.lock);
>  }
>  
>  /* Shut down the per-CPU GIC interface */
>  void gic_disable_cpu(void)
>  {
> -    spin_lock(&gic.lock);
> +    spin_lock_irq(&gic.lock);
>      gic_cpu_disable();
>      gic_hyp_disable();
> -    spin_unlock(&gic.lock);
> +    spin_unlock_irq(&gic.lock);
>  }
>  
>  void gic_route_irqs(void)
> @@ -439,7 +439,7 @@ void gic_set_guest_irq(unsigned int virtual_irq,
>  
>      events_maintenance(current);
>  
> -    spin_lock(&gic.lock);
> +    spin_lock_irq(&gic.lock);
>  
>      if ( list_empty(&gic.lr_pending) )
>      {
> @@ -465,7 +465,7 @@ void gic_set_guest_irq(unsigned int virtual_irq,
>      list_add_tail(&n->lr_queue, &gic.lr_pending);
>  
>  out:
> -    spin_unlock(&gic.lock);
> +    spin_unlock_irq(&gic.lock);
>      return;
>  }
>  
> @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ static void events_maintenance(struct vcpu *v)
>              (unsigned long *)&vcpu_info(v, evtchn_upcall_pending));
>  
>      if (!already_pending && gic.event_mask != 0) {
> -        spin_lock(&gic.lock);
> +        spin_lock_irq(&gic.lock);
>          while ((i = find_next_bit((const long unsigned int *) 
> &gic.event_mask,
>                          sizeof(uint64_t), i)) < sizeof(uint64_t)) {
>  
> @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static void events_maintenance(struct vcpu *v)
>  
>              i++;
>          }
> -        spin_unlock(&gic.lock);
> +        spin_unlock_irq(&gic.lock);
>      }
>  }
>  
> @@ -585,7 +585,7 @@ static void maintenance_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id, 
> struct cpu_user_regs *r
>                                sizeof(eisr), i)) < sizeof(eisr)) {
>          struct pending_irq *p;
>  
> -        spin_lock(&gic.lock);
> +        spin_lock_irq(&gic.lock);
>          lr = GICH[GICH_LR + i];
>          virq = lr & GICH_LR_VIRTUAL_MASK;
>          GICH[GICH_LR + i] = 0;
> @@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ static void maintenance_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id, 
> struct cpu_user_regs *r
>          } else {
>              gic_inject_irq_stop();
>          }
> -        spin_unlock(&gic.lock);
> +        spin_unlock_irq(&gic.lock);
>  
>          spin_lock(&current->arch.vgic.lock);
               ^
shouldn't you change this into spin_lock_irq too?

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel