[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/xen: Introduce a global flag to fix the MSI mask bug
On 27/10/14 19:45, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:09:42AM +0000, David Vrabel wrote: >> On 27/10/14 02:44, Yijing Wang wrote: >>> Commit 0e4ccb1505a9 ("PCI: Add x86_msi.msi_mask_irq() and msix_mask_irq()") >>> fixed MSI mask bug which may cause kernel crash. But the commit >>> made MSI code complex. Introduce a new global flag "pci_msi_ignore_mask" >>> to ignore MSI/MSI-X to fix this issue, it's a cleaner solution. >>> And the commit 0e4ccb1505a9 will be reverted in the later patch. >> >> Reviewed-by: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> In the sense that it keeps the odd Xen behaviour. But... >> >> Konrad, why was this fixed like this in the first place? IMO, it would > > As 0e4ccb1505a9 explains: > PCI: Add x86_msi.msi_mask_irq() and msix_mask_irq() > > Certain platforms do not allow writes in the MSI-X BARs to setup or tear > down vector values. To combat against the generic code trying to write to > that and either silently being ignored or crashing due to the pagetables > being marked R/O this patch introduces a platform override. > > Note that we keep two separate, non-weak, functions > default_mask_msi_irqs() > and default_mask_msix_irqs() for the behavior of the arch_mask_msi_irqs() > and arch_mask_msix_irqs(), as the default behavior is needed by x86 PCI > code. > > For Xen, which does not allow the guest to write to MSI-X tables - as the > hypervisor is solely responsible for setting the vector values - we > implement two nops. My question specifically was: could this be fixed by allowing writes to set/clear the mask bit? If so, why was this not done and could we do this now? David _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |