Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 10/24] xen/arm: gic: Add sanity checks gic_route_irq_to_guest

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 23/02/15 15:52, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 15:47 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
>> Hi Ian,
>>
>> On 23/02/15 15:20, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 17:28 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>> The priority is controlled by route_irq_to_guest and set statically
>>>> using GIC_PRI_IRQ.
>>>>
>>>> If we decide to hardcoded the priority here, we should drop the
>>>> parameter on gic_route_irq_guest. But not keeping both.
>>>
>>> There is a middle ground, which is for guest-routed IRQs to be allowed a
>>> subset of the real priorities, but until those associated checks are in
>>> place I think hardcoding in gic_route_irq_to_guest leaves less scope for
>>> mistakes.
>>
>> The interface for routing an IRQ to xen (gic_route_irq_to_xen) is taking
>> the priority in parameter.
> 
> It's useful and safe in the route to xen case.
> 
>> I would prefer if we keep the same interface for guest and then hardcode
>> the value in route_irq_to_guest.
> 
> In which case I think route_irq_to_guest should complain/error-out if
> the priority given is not the default one until such a time as it
> understands which inputs are safe.

I guess you mean gic_route_irq_to_guest?

I could add a check and error-out for this case.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall

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