[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 Jan, On 03/03/17 07:58, Jan Beulich wrote: On 02.03.17 at 21:56, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:Ping? I'd like the question to be sorted out before Andre is sending a new version. On 02/15/2017 09:25 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:On Wed, 15 Feb 2017, Julien Grall wrote:Hi Stefano, On 14/02/17 21:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote:On Mon, 30 Jan 2017, Andre Przywara wrote:+/* + * 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. */ + if ( !hlpi.virt_lpi ) + return; + + d = get_domain_by_id(hlpi.dom_id); + if ( !d ) + return; + + if ( hlpi.vcpu_id >= d->max_vcpus ) + { + put_domain(d); + return; + } + + vcpu = d->vcpu[hlpi.vcpu_id]; + + put_domain(d); + + vgic_vcpu_inject_irq(vcpu, hlpi.virt_lpi);put_domain should be hereWhy? I don't even understand why we would need to take a reference on the domain for LPIs. Would not it be enough to use rcu_lock_domain_by_id here?I think that rcu_lock_domain_by_id would also work, but similarly we would need to call rcu_unlock here. To be honest, I don't know exactly in which cases get_domain should be used instead of rcu_lock_domain_by_id.Aiui get_domain() is needed when you want to retain the reference across an operation that may involved blocking/scheduling. The RCU variant should be sufficient whenever you only need to make sure the domain won't go away for the duration of (a portion of) a function, since final domain destruction gets carried out from an RCU callback. Thank you for explanation. I think it makes sense. There will be no scheduling or softirq_pending involves in do_LPI so using rcu_lock_domain_by_id seems more suitable here. Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |