[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 11/28] ARM: GICv3: forward pending LPIs to guests



Hi Andre,

On 30/01/17 18:31, Andre Przywara wrote:
Upon receiving an LPI, we need to find the right VCPU and virtual IRQ
number to get this IRQ injected.
Iterate our two-level LPI table to find this information quickly when
the host takes an LPI. Call the existing injection function to let the
GIC emulation deal with this interrupt.

Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx>
---
 xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-lpi.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 xen/arch/arm/gic.c        |  6 ++++--
 xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h |  8 ++++++++
 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-lpi.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-lpi.c
index 8f6e7f3..d270053 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-lpi.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-lpi.c
@@ -86,6 +86,47 @@ uint64_t gicv3_get_redist_address(int cpu, bool use_pta)
         return per_cpu(redist_id, cpu) << 16;
 }

+/*
+ * Handle incoming LPIs, which are a bit special, because they are potentially
+ * numerous and also only get injected into guests. Treat them specially here,
+ * by just looking up their target vCPU and virtual LPI number and hand it
+ * over to the injection function.
+ */
+void do_LPI(unsigned int lpi)
+{
+    struct domain *d;
+    union host_lpi *hlpip, hlpi;
+    struct vcpu *vcpu;
+
+    WRITE_SYSREG32(lpi, ICC_EOIR1_EL1);
+
+    hlpip = gic_get_host_lpi(lpi);
+    if ( !hlpip )
+        return;
+
+    hlpi.data = read_u64_atomic(&hlpip->data);
+
+    /* We may have mapped more host LPIs than the guest actually asked for. */

Another way, is the interrupt has been received at the same time the guest is configuring it. What will happen if the interrupt is lost?

+    if ( !hlpi.virt_lpi )
+        return;
+
+    d = get_domain_by_id(hlpi.dom_id);
+    if ( !d )
+        return;
+
+    if ( hlpi.vcpu_id >= d->max_vcpus )

A comment would be certainly useful here to explain why this check.

+    {
+        put_domain(d);
+        return;
+    }
+
+    vcpu = d->vcpu[hlpi.vcpu_id];
+
+    put_domain(d);
+
+    vgic_vcpu_inject_irq(vcpu, hlpi.virt_lpi);
+}
+
 uint64_t gicv3_lpi_allocate_pendtable(void)
 {
     uint64_t reg;
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c
index bd3c032..7286e5d 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c
@@ -700,8 +700,10 @@ void gic_interrupt(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, int is_fiq)
             local_irq_enable();
             do_IRQ(regs, irq, is_fiq);
             local_irq_disable();
-        }
-        else if (unlikely(irq < 16))
+        } else if ( is_lpi(irq) )

Coding style:

}
else if (...)
{
}
else if (...)

+        {
+            do_LPI(irq);

I really don't want to see GICv3 specific code called in common code. Please introduce a specific callback in gic_hw_operations.

+        } else if ( unlikely(irq < 16) )
         {
             do_sgi(regs, irq);
         }
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
index 8f7a167..ee47de8 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
@@ -34,6 +34,14 @@ struct irq_desc *__irq_to_desc(int irq);

 void do_IRQ(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, unsigned int irq, int is_fiq);

+#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_ITS
+void do_LPI(unsigned int irq);
+#else
+static inline void do_LPI(unsigned int irq)
+{
+}
+#endif
+

This would avoid such ugly hack where do_LPI is define in gic-v3-its.c but declared in irq.h.

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall

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

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.