From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] x86/hvm: allowing registering EOI callbacks for GSIs
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 08:34:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <06192f36-dae3-9626-3fe5-98722d2753f5@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YG3m9nW6xPeL7MPr@Air-de-Roger>
On 07.04.2021 19:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 05:51:14PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 31.03.2021 12:32, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> +bool hvm_gsi_has_callbacks(const struct domain *d, unsigned int gsi)
>>> +{
>>> + struct hvm_irq *hvm_irq = hvm_domain_irq(d);
>>> + bool has_callbacks;
>>> +
>>> + read_lock(&hvm_irq->gsi_callbacks_lock);
>>> + has_callbacks = !list_empty(&hvm_irq->gsi_callbacks[gsi]);
>>> + read_unlock(&hvm_irq->gsi_callbacks_lock);
>>> +
>>> + return has_callbacks;
>>> +}
>>
>> What use is this function? Its result is stale by the time the
>> caller can look at it, as you've dropped the lock.
>
> Right, that function is only used to decide whether the vIOAPIC needs
> to register an EOI callback when injecting a vector to the vlapic. The
> workflow is to first register a callback with the vIOAPIC and
> afterwards inject an interrupt which will trigger the callback
> logic.
>
> Playing with the callback registration while interrupts can be
> injected will likely result in a malfunction of the device that relies
> on those callbacks, but that's to be expected anyway when playing such
> games.
>
> That said multiple users sharing a vIOAPIC pin should be fine as long
> as they follow the logic above: always register a callback before
> attempting to inject an interrupt.
May I ask that you add a comment ahead of this function pointing out
the restriction?
>>> @@ -443,7 +457,8 @@ static void ioapic_inj_irq(
>>> struct vlapic *target,
>>> uint8_t vector,
>>> uint8_t trig_mode,
>>> - uint8_t delivery_mode)
>>> + uint8_t delivery_mode,
>>> + bool callback)
>>> {
>>> HVM_DBG_LOG(DBG_LEVEL_IOAPIC, "irq %d trig %d deliv %d",
>>> vector, trig_mode, delivery_mode);
>>> @@ -452,7 +467,7 @@ static void ioapic_inj_irq(
>>> (delivery_mode == dest_LowestPrio));
>>>
>>> vlapic_set_irq_callback(target, vector, trig_mode,
>>> - trig_mode ? eoi_callback : NULL, NULL);
>>> + callback ? eoi_callback : NULL, NULL);
>>
>> I think you'd better use trig_mode || callback here and ...
>>
>>> @@ -466,6 +481,7 @@ static void vioapic_deliver(struct hvm_vioapic *vioapic, unsigned int pin)
>>> struct vlapic *target;
>>> struct vcpu *v;
>>> unsigned int irq = vioapic->base_gsi + pin;
>>> + bool callback = trig_mode || hvm_gsi_has_callbacks(d, irq);
>>>
>>> ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&d->arch.hvm.irq_lock));
>>>
>>> @@ -492,7 +508,8 @@ static void vioapic_deliver(struct hvm_vioapic *vioapic, unsigned int pin)
>>> target = vlapic_lowest_prio(d, NULL, 0, dest, dest_mode);
>>> if ( target != NULL )
>>> {
>>> - ioapic_inj_irq(vioapic, target, vector, trig_mode, delivery_mode);
>>> + ioapic_inj_irq(vioapic, target, vector, trig_mode, delivery_mode,
>>> + callback);
>>
>> ... invoke hvm_gsi_has_callbacks() right here and ...
>>
>>> @@ -507,7 +524,7 @@ static void vioapic_deliver(struct hvm_vioapic *vioapic, unsigned int pin)
>>> for_each_vcpu ( d, v )
>>> if ( vlapic_match_dest(vcpu_vlapic(v), NULL, 0, dest, dest_mode) )
>>> ioapic_inj_irq(vioapic, vcpu_vlapic(v), vector, trig_mode,
>>> - delivery_mode);
>>> + delivery_mode, callback);
>>
>> ... here, avoiding to call the function when you don't need the
>> result.
>
> I think there's a slim chance of not needing to use the callback local
> variable, and hence didn't consider limiting it. I can do, but I'm
> unsure this will bring any real benefit while making the code more
> complex IMO.
Really the variable remaining unused in a minor set of cases was only
a secondary observation. What I first stumbled over is the moving of
the decision whether a callback is wanted from ioapic_inj_irq() to its
caller. Since the function clearly is intended as a helper of
vioapic_deliver(), I guess in the end it's fine the way you have it.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 6:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-31 10:32 [PATCH v3 00/11] x86/intr: introduce EOI callbacks and fix vPT Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 01/11] x86/hvm: drop vcpu parameter from vlapic EOI callbacks Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 16:02 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 16:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-04-01 9:12 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-01 11:06 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 7:41 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-07 8:19 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 02/11] x86/hvm: drop domain parameter from vioapic/vpic " Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 16:04 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-01 9:15 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-01 9:28 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 03/11] x86/vlapic: introduce an EOI callback mechanism Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 11:47 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-03-31 12:50 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-07 14:55 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 16:27 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 6:20 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 9:12 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 10:49 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 10:56 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 04/11] x86/vmsi: use the newly introduced EOI callbacks Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-07 14:59 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 05/11] x86/vioapic: switch to use the EOI callback mechanism Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-07 15:19 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 16:46 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 6:27 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 8:59 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 10:52 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 06/11] x86/hvm: allowing registering EOI callbacks for GSIs Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-07 15:51 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 17:08 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 6:34 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2021-04-15 16:04 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-16 7:29 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-19 8:31 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 12:52 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 14:31 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 15:06 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 07/11] x86/dpci: move code Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 08/11] x86/dpci: switch to use a GSI EOI callback Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-08 14:49 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 15:23 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 09/11] x86/vpt: switch interrupt injection model Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-14 10:28 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-14 13:37 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-14 14:05 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-14 14:20 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 10/11] x86/vpt: remove vPT timers per-vCPU lists Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-14 10:38 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 11/11] x86/vpt: introduce a per-vPT lock Roger Pau Monne
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=06192f36-dae3-9626-3fe5-98722d2753f5@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).