[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 33/39] ARM: new VGIC: Add preliminary stub implementation
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, Andre Przywara wrote: > The ARM arch code requires an interrupt controller emulation to implement > vgic_clear_pending_irqs(), although it is suspected that it is actually > not necessary. Go with a stub for now to make the linker happy. > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> > --- > xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c > index 23b8abfc5e..b70fdaaecb 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c > @@ -791,6 +791,14 @@ void gic_dump_vgic_info(struct vcpu *v) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&v->arch.vgic.ap_list_lock, flags); > } > > +void vgic_clear_pending_irqs(struct vcpu *v) > +{ > + /* > + * TODO: It is unclear whether we really need this, so we might instead > + * remove it on the caller site. > + */ > +} This is OK for now. However, thinking about this issue, is it possible for a vcpu to send an interrupt to an offline vcpu, maybe an SGI? What would happen in that case? It looks like that vgic_mmio_write_sgir would allow it. Otherwise, a vcpu could cause the generation of a physical interrupt, an SPI, targeting an offline vcpu. Maybe we should WARN in case ap_list is not empty? > /** > * arch_move_irqs() - migrate the physical affinity of hardware mapped vIRQs > * @v: the vCPU, already assigned to the new pCPU > -- > 2.14.1 > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |