|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 11/33] xen/arm: route_irq_to_guest: Check validity of the IRQ
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Julien Grall wrote:
> Currently Xen only supports SPIs routing for guest, add a function
> is_assignable_irq to check if we can assign a given IRQ to the guest.
>
> Secondly, make sure the vIRQ is not the greater that the number of IRQs
> configured in the vGIC and it's an SPI.
>
> Thirdly, when the IRQ is already assigned to the domain, check the user
> is not asking to use a different vIRQ than the one already bound.
>
> Finally, desc->arch.type which contains the IRQ type (i.e level/edge) must
> be correctly configured before. The misconfiguration can happen when:
> - the device has been blacklisted for the current platform
> - the IRQ has not been described in the device tree
>
> Also, use XENLOG_G_ERR in the error message within the function as it will
> be later called from a guest.
>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Changes in v4:
> - Use NR_LOCAL_IRQS rather than 32
> - Move the check to the IRQ and irq_to_desc after the vIRQ check
> - Typoes and rewording the commit message and in the patch
> - Use printk rather than dprintk.
>
> Changes in v3:
> - Fix typo in commit message and comment
> - Add a check that the vIRQ is an SPI
> - Check if the user is not asking for a different vIRQ when the
> IRQ is already assigned to the guest
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Rename is_routable_irq into is_assignable_irq
> - Check if the IRQ is not greater than the number handled by the
> number of IRQs handled by the gic
> - Move is_assignable_irq in irq.c rather than defining in the
> header irq.h
> - Retrieve the irq descriptor after checking the validity of the
> IRQ
> - vgic_num_irqs has been moved in a separate patch
> - Fix the irq check against vgic_num_irqs
> - Use virq instead of irq for vGIC sanity check
> ---
> xen/arch/arm/irq.c | 59
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/irq.c b/xen/arch/arm/irq.c
> index beb746a..4c3e381 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/irq.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/irq.c
> @@ -387,6 +387,16 @@ err:
> return rc;
> }
>
> +bool_t is_assignable_irq(unsigned int irq)
> +{
> + /* For now, we can only route SPIs to the guest */
> + return ((irq >= NR_LOCAL_IRQS) && (irq < gic_number_lines()));
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Route an IRQ to a specific guest.
> + * For now only SPIs are assignable to the guest.
> + */
> int route_irq_to_guest(struct domain *d, unsigned int virq,
> unsigned int irq, const char * devname)
> {
> @@ -396,6 +406,28 @@ int route_irq_to_guest(struct domain *d, unsigned int
> virq,
> unsigned long flags;
> int retval = 0;
>
> + if ( virq >= vgic_num_irqs(d) )
> + {
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR
> + "the vIRQ number %u is too high for domain %u (max = %u)\n",
> + irq, d->domain_id, vgic_num_irqs(d));
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + /* Only routing to virtual SPIs is supported */
> + if ( virq < NR_LOCAL_IRQS )
> + {
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "IRQ can only be routed to an SPI");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if ( !is_assignable_irq(irq) )
> + {
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "the IRQ%u is not routable\n", irq);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> +
> action = xmalloc(struct irqaction);
> if ( !action )
> return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -416,8 +448,18 @@ int route_irq_to_guest(struct domain *d, unsigned int
> virq,
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&desc->lock, flags);
>
> - /* If the IRQ is already used by someone
> - * - If it's the same domain -> Xen doesn't need to update the IRQ desc
> + if ( desc->arch.type == DT_IRQ_TYPE_INVALID )
> + {
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "IRQ %u has not been configured\n", irq);
> + retval = -EIO;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * If the IRQ is already used by someone
> + * - If it's the same domain -> Xen doesn't need to update the IRQ desc.
> + * For safety check if we are not trying to assign the IRQ to a
> + * different vIRQ.
> * - Otherwise -> For now, don't allow the IRQ to be shared between
> * Xen and domains.
> */
> @@ -426,13 +468,22 @@ int route_irq_to_guest(struct domain *d, unsigned int
> virq,
> struct domain *ad = irq_get_domain(desc);
>
> if ( test_bit(_IRQ_GUEST, &desc->status) && d == ad )
> + {
> + if ( irq_get_guest_info(desc)->virq != virq )
> + {
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR
> + "d%u: IRQ %u is already assigned to vIRQ %u\n",
> + d->domain_id, irq, irq_get_guest_info(desc)->virq);
> + retval = -EBUSY;
> + }
> goto out;
> + }
>
> if ( test_bit(_IRQ_GUEST, &desc->status) )
> - printk(XENLOG_ERR "ERROR: IRQ %u is already used by domain %u\n",
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "IRQ %u is already used by domain %u\n",
> irq, ad->domain_id);
> else
> - printk(XENLOG_ERR "ERROR: IRQ %u is already used by Xen\n", irq);
> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "IRQ %u is already used by Xen\n", irq);
> retval = -EBUSY;
> goto out;
> }
> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
> index f00eb11..71b39e7 100644
> --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
> @@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ void do_IRQ(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, unsigned int irq,
> int is_fiq);
>
> #define domain_pirq_to_irq(d, pirq) (pirq)
>
> +bool_t is_assignable_irq(unsigned int irq);
> +
> void init_IRQ(void);
> void init_secondary_IRQ(void);
>
> --
> 2.1.4
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |