[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] x86/io-apic: fix directed EOI when using AMd-Vi interrupt remapping
On Mon, 2024-10-21 at 15:51 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 21/10/2024 3:06 pm, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 12:34:37PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 10:08 +0200, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > > > > When using AMD-VI interrupt remapping the vector field in the IO-APIC > > > > RTE is > > > > repurposed to contain part of the offset into the remapping table. > > > > Previous to > > > > 2ca9fbd739b8 Xen had logic so that the offset into the interrupt > > > > remapping > > > > table would match the vector. Such logic was mandatory for end of > > > > interrupt to > > > > work, since the vector field (even when not containing a vector) is > > > > used by the > > > > IO-APIC to find for which pin the EOI must be performed. > > > > > > > > Introduce a table to store the EOI handlers when using interrupt > > > > remapping, so > > > > that the IO-APIC driver can translate pins into EOI handlers without > > > > having to > > > > read the IO-APIC RTE entry. Note that to simplify the logic such table > > > > is used > > > > unconditionally when interrupt remapping is enabled, even if strictly > > > > it would > > > > only be required for AMD-Vi. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Willi Junga <xenproject@xxxxxx> > > > > Suggested-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Fixes: 2ca9fbd739b8 ('AMD IOMMU: allocate IRTE entries instead of using > > > > a static mapping') > > > > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Hm, couldn't we just have used the pin#? > > Yes, but that would require a much bigger change that what's currently > > presented here, and for backport purposes I think it's better done > > this way for fixing this specific bug. > > > > Changing to use pin# as the IR offset is worthwhile, but IMO needs to > > be done separated from the bugfix here. > > > > > The AMD IOMMU has per-device IRTE, so you *know* you can just use IRTE > > > indices 0-23 for the I/O APIC pins. > > Aren't there IO-APICs with more than 24 pins? > > Recent Intel SoCs have a single IO-APIC with 120 pins. And Xen offers a 32-pin one to guests IIRC. I should have said. 'you can just use IRTE indices 0-(N-1) for the I/O APIC pins'. The point is the IRTE is per-device, unless the platform has more than one I/O APIC with the *same* requester-id. Attachment:
smime.p7s
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |