[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 09/13] xen/arm: second irq injection while the first irq is still inflight
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 13:32 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > @@ -626,19 +644,36 @@ static void gic_update_one_lr(struct vcpu *v, int i) > > ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&v->arch.vgic.lock)); > > > > lr = GICH[GICH_LR + i]; > > - if ( !(lr & (GICH_LR_PENDING|GICH_LR_ACTIVE)) ) > > + irq = (lr >> GICH_LR_VIRTUAL_SHIFT) & GICH_LR_VIRTUAL_MASK; > > + p = irq_to_pending(v, irq); > > + if ( lr & GICH_LR_ACTIVE ) > > { > > + if ( test_bit(GIC_IRQ_GUEST_ENABLED, &p->status) && > > + test_and_clear_bit(GIC_IRQ_GUEST_QUEUED, &p->status) ) > > + { > > + if ( p->desc == NULL ) > > + GICH[GICH_LR + i] = lr | GICH_LR_PENDING; > > + else > > + gdprintk(XENLOG_WARNING, "unable to inject hw irq=%d into > > d%dv%d: already active in LR%d\n", > > + irq, v->domain->domain_id, v->vcpu_id, i); > > How common is this? Or should it never actually happen in reality? It should never happen > > + } > > + } else if ( lr & GICH_LR_PENDING ) { > > + int q __attribute__ ((unused)) = > > test_and_clear_bit(GIC_IRQ_GUEST_QUEUED, &p->status); > > +#ifdef GIC_DEBUG > > + if ( q ) > > if ( test_and_clear_bit(GIC_IRQ_GUEST_QUEUED, &p->status) ) > #ifdef GIC_DEBUG > > + gdprintk(XENLOG_DEBUG, "trying to inject irq=%d into d%dv%d, > > when it is already pending in LR%d\n", > > + irq, v->domain->domain_id, v->vcpu_id, i); > #else > ; /* Nothing to do */ > #endif > > would be nicer than attribute unused IMHO. > > As it's a XENLOG_DEBUG this wouldn't be all that bad by default BTW, > given that the already active case isn't even conditional. This case can actually happen though _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |