From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoffer Dall Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] KVM: arm/arm64: Report PMU overflow interrupts to userspace irqchip Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 21:04:13 +0200 Message-ID: <20170406190413.GH27123@cbox> References: <20170405092815.22503-1-cdall@linaro.org> <20170405092815.22503-5-cdall@linaro.org> <6c476719-8fb3-27b6-c7f6-84088443dcd4@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Graf , Peter Maydell , Pekka Enberg , Christoffer Dall To: Marc Zyngier Return-path: Received: from mail-wr0-f177.google.com ([209.85.128.177]:36009 "EHLO mail-wr0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752194AbdDFTEQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2017 15:04:16 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f177.google.com with SMTP id c55so3115294wrc.3 for ; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 12:04:15 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6c476719-8fb3-27b6-c7f6-84088443dcd4@arm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 06:12:10PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 05/04/17 10:28, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > From: Christoffer Dall > > > > When not using an in-kernel VGIC, but instead emulating an interrupt > > controller in userspace, we should report the PMU overflow status to > > that userspace interrupt controller using the KVM_CAP_ARM_USER_IRQ > > feature. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall > > --- > > arch/arm/kvm/arm.c | 9 ++++++--- > > include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 7 +++++++ > > virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 3 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c > > index efb16e5..f935383 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c > > @@ -635,11 +635,13 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run) > > > > /* > > * If we have a singal pending, or need to notify a userspace > > - * irqchip about timer level changes, then we exit (and update > > - * the timer level state in kvm_timer_update_run below). > > + * irqchip about timer or PMU level changes, then we exit (and > > + * update the timer level state in kvm_timer_update_run > > + * below). > > */ > > if (signal_pending(current) || > > - kvm_timer_should_notify_user(vcpu)) { > > + kvm_timer_should_notify_user(vcpu) || > > + kvm_pmu_should_notify_user(vcpu)) { > > ret = -EINTR; > > run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_INTR; > > } > > @@ -713,6 +715,7 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run) > > > > /* Tell userspace about in-kernel device output levels */ > > kvm_timer_update_run(vcpu); > > + kvm_pmu_update_run(vcpu); > > Very minor nit: as we now have a couple of functions that are going to > check the same thing (irqchip_in_kernel), we could consider moving the > test here. I don't have strong feelings about it though. I like it: diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c index f935383..4263785 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c @@ -714,8 +714,10 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run) } /* Tell userspace about in-kernel device output levels */ - kvm_timer_update_run(vcpu); - kvm_pmu_update_run(vcpu); + if (unlikely(!irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) { + kvm_timer_update_run(vcpu); + kvm_pmu_update_run(vcpu); + } if (vcpu->sigset_active) sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &sigsaved, NULL); diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c index 5dc2167..5976609 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c @@ -193,9 +193,6 @@ void kvm_timer_update_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) struct arch_timer_context *ptimer = vcpu_ptimer(vcpu); struct kvm_sync_regs *regs = &vcpu->run->s.regs; - if (likely(irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) - return; - /* Populate the device bitmap with the timer states */ regs->device_irq_level &= ~(KVM_ARM_DEV_EL1_VTIMER | KVM_ARM_DEV_EL1_PTIMER); diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c index 51218be..4b43e7f 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c @@ -262,9 +262,6 @@ void kvm_pmu_update_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { struct kvm_sync_regs *regs = &vcpu->run->s.regs; - if (likely(irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) - return; - /* Populate the timer bitmap for user space */ regs->device_irq_level &= ~KVM_ARM_DEV_PMU; if (vcpu->arch.pmu.irq_level) Thanks, -Christoffer From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: cdall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 21:04:13 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 4/5] KVM: arm/arm64: Report PMU overflow interrupts to userspace irqchip In-Reply-To: <6c476719-8fb3-27b6-c7f6-84088443dcd4@arm.com> References: <20170405092815.22503-1-cdall@linaro.org> <20170405092815.22503-5-cdall@linaro.org> <6c476719-8fb3-27b6-c7f6-84088443dcd4@arm.com> Message-ID: <20170406190413.GH27123@cbox> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 06:12:10PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 05/04/17 10:28, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > From: Christoffer Dall > > > > When not using an in-kernel VGIC, but instead emulating an interrupt > > controller in userspace, we should report the PMU overflow status to > > that userspace interrupt controller using the KVM_CAP_ARM_USER_IRQ > > feature. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall > > --- > > arch/arm/kvm/arm.c | 9 ++++++--- > > include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 7 +++++++ > > virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 3 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c > > index efb16e5..f935383 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c > > @@ -635,11 +635,13 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run) > > > > /* > > * If we have a singal pending, or need to notify a userspace > > - * irqchip about timer level changes, then we exit (and update > > - * the timer level state in kvm_timer_update_run below). > > + * irqchip about timer or PMU level changes, then we exit (and > > + * update the timer level state in kvm_timer_update_run > > + * below). > > */ > > if (signal_pending(current) || > > - kvm_timer_should_notify_user(vcpu)) { > > + kvm_timer_should_notify_user(vcpu) || > > + kvm_pmu_should_notify_user(vcpu)) { > > ret = -EINTR; > > run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_INTR; > > } > > @@ -713,6 +715,7 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run) > > > > /* Tell userspace about in-kernel device output levels */ > > kvm_timer_update_run(vcpu); > > + kvm_pmu_update_run(vcpu); > > Very minor nit: as we now have a couple of functions that are going to > check the same thing (irqchip_in_kernel), we could consider moving the > test here. I don't have strong feelings about it though. I like it: diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c index f935383..4263785 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c @@ -714,8 +714,10 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run) } /* Tell userspace about in-kernel device output levels */ - kvm_timer_update_run(vcpu); - kvm_pmu_update_run(vcpu); + if (unlikely(!irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) { + kvm_timer_update_run(vcpu); + kvm_pmu_update_run(vcpu); + } if (vcpu->sigset_active) sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &sigsaved, NULL); diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c index 5dc2167..5976609 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c @@ -193,9 +193,6 @@ void kvm_timer_update_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) struct arch_timer_context *ptimer = vcpu_ptimer(vcpu); struct kvm_sync_regs *regs = &vcpu->run->s.regs; - if (likely(irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) - return; - /* Populate the device bitmap with the timer states */ regs->device_irq_level &= ~(KVM_ARM_DEV_EL1_VTIMER | KVM_ARM_DEV_EL1_PTIMER); diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c index 51218be..4b43e7f 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c @@ -262,9 +262,6 @@ void kvm_pmu_update_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { struct kvm_sync_regs *regs = &vcpu->run->s.regs; - if (likely(irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) - return; - /* Populate the timer bitmap for user space */ regs->device_irq_level &= ~KVM_ARM_DEV_PMU; if (vcpu->arch.pmu.irq_level) Thanks, -Christoffer