All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	"Robert Richter" <rrichter@marvell.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Eric Auger" <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	"Julien Thierry" <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state SGI callbacks
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:11:46 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19a7c193f0e4b97343e822a35f0911ed@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 2020/2/18 23:31, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c 
> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> index 7656b353a95f..0ed286dba827 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ struct event_lpi_map {
>       u16            *col_map;
>       irq_hw_number_t        lpi_base;
>       int            nr_lpis;
> -    raw_spinlock_t        vlpi_lock;
> +    raw_spinlock_t        map_lock;

So we use map_lock to protect both LPI's and VLPI's mapping affinity of
a device, and use vpe_lock to protect vPE's affinity, OK.

>       struct its_vm        *vm;
>       struct its_vlpi_map    *vlpi_maps;
>       int            nr_vlpis;
> @@ -240,15 +240,33 @@ static struct its_vlpi_map *get_vlpi_map(struct 
> irq_data *d)
>       return NULL;
>   }
> 
> -static int irq_to_cpuid(struct irq_data *d)
> +static int irq_to_cpuid_lock(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long *flags)
>   {
> -    struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> +    int cpu;
> 
> -    if (map)
> -        return map->vpe->col_idx;
> +    if (map) {
> +        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&map->vpe->vpe_lock, *flags);
> +        cpu = map->vpe->col_idx;
> +    } else {
> +        struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock, *flags);
> +        cpu = its_dev->event_map.col_map[its_get_event_id(d)];
> +    }
> 
> -    return its_dev->event_map.col_map[its_get_event_id(d)];
> +    return cpu;
> +}

This helper is correct for normal LPIs and VLPIs, but wrong for per-vPE
IRQ (doorbell) and vSGIs. irq_data_get_irq_chip_data() gets confused by
both of them.

> +
> +static void irq_to_cpuid_unlock(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long flags)
> +{
> +    struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> +
> +    if (map) {
> +        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&map->vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
> +    } else {
> +        struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock, flags);
> +    }
>   }

The same problem for this helper.

> 
>   static struct its_collection *valid_col(struct its_collection *col)
> @@ -1384,6 +1402,8 @@ static void direct_lpi_inv(struct irq_data *d)
>   {
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
>       void __iomem *rdbase;
> +    unsigned long flags;
> +    int cpu;
>       u64 val;
> 
>       if (map) {
> @@ -1399,10 +1419,12 @@ static void direct_lpi_inv(struct irq_data *d)
>       }
> 
>       /* Target the redistributor this LPI is currently routed to */
> -    rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, irq_to_cpuid(d))->rd_base;
> +    cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>       gic_write_lpir(val, rdbase + GICR_INVLPIR);
> 
>       wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>   }
> 
>   static void lpi_update_config(struct irq_data *d, u8 clr, u8 set)
> @@ -1471,11 +1493,11 @@ static void its_unmask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>   static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask 
> *mask_val,
>                   bool force)
>   {
> -    unsigned int cpu;
>       const struct cpumask *cpu_mask = cpu_online_mask;
>       struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       struct its_collection *target_col;
> -    u32 id = its_get_event_id(d);
> +    unsigned int from, cpu;
> +    unsigned long flags;
> 
>       /* A forwarded interrupt should use irq_set_vcpu_affinity */
>       if (irqd_is_forwarded_to_vcpu(d))
> @@ -1496,12 +1518,16 @@ static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, 
> const struct cpumask *mask_val,
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
>       /* don't set the affinity when the target cpu is same as current 
> one */
> -    if (cpu != its_dev->event_map.col_map[id]) {
> +    from = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    if (cpu != from) {
> +        u32 id = its_get_event_id(d);
> +
>           target_col = &its_dev->its->collections[cpu];
>           its_send_movi(its_dev, target_col, id);
>           its_dev->event_map.col_map[id] = cpu;
>           irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
>       }
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
> 
>       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>   }
> @@ -1636,7 +1662,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_map(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       if (!info->map)
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       if (!its_dev->event_map.vm) {
>           struct its_vlpi_map *maps;
> @@ -1685,7 +1711,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_map(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       }
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -1695,7 +1721,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_get(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map;
>       int ret = 0;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> 
> @@ -1708,7 +1734,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_get(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       *info->map = *map;
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -1718,7 +1744,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_unmap(struct irq_data *d)
>       u32 event = its_get_event_id(d);
>       int ret = 0;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       if (!its_dev->event_map.vm || !irqd_is_forwarded_to_vcpu(d)) {
>           ret = -EINVAL;
> @@ -1748,7 +1774,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_unmap(struct irq_data *d)
>       }
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -3193,7 +3219,7 @@ static struct its_device *its_create_device(struct 
> its_node *its, u32 dev_id,
>       dev->event_map.col_map = col_map;
>       dev->event_map.lpi_base = lpi_base;
>       dev->event_map.nr_lpis = nr_lpis;
> -    raw_spin_lock_init(&dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock_init(&dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       dev->device_id = dev_id;
>       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev->entry);
> 
> @@ -3560,6 +3586,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>   {
>       struct its_vpe *vpe = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       int from, cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val);
> +    unsigned long flags;
> 
>       /*
>        * Changing affinity is mega expensive, so let's be as lazy as
> @@ -3567,6 +3594,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>        * into the proxy device, we need to move the doorbell
>        * interrupt to its new location.
>        */
> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>       if (vpe->col_idx == cpu)
>           goto out;
> 
> @@ -3586,6 +3614,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
> 
>   out:
>       irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
> 
>       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>   }
> @@ -3695,11 +3724,15 @@ static void its_vpe_send_inv(struct irq_data *d)
> 
>       if (gic_rdists->has_direct_lpi) {
>           void __iomem *rdbase;
> +        unsigned long flags;
> +        int cpu;
> 
>           /* Target the redistributor this VPE is currently known on */
> -        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
> +        cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>           gic_write_lpir(d->parent_data->hwirq, rdbase + GICR_INVLPIR);
>           wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
> +        irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       } else {
>           its_vpe_send_cmd(vpe, its_send_inv);
>       }

Do we really need to grab the vpe_lock for those which are belong to
the same irqchip with its_vpe_set_affinity()? The IRQ core code should
already ensure the mutual exclusion among them, wrong?

> @@ -3735,14 +3768,18 @@ static int its_vpe_set_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
> 
>       if (gic_rdists->has_direct_lpi) {
>           void __iomem *rdbase;
> +        unsigned long flags;
> +        int cpu;
> 
> -        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
> +        cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>           if (state) {
>               gic_write_lpir(vpe->vpe_db_lpi, rdbase + GICR_SETLPIR);
>           } else {
>               gic_write_lpir(vpe->vpe_db_lpi, rdbase + GICR_CLRLPIR);
>               wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
>           }
> +        irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       } else {
>           if (state)
>               its_vpe_send_cmd(vpe, its_send_int);
> @@ -3854,14 +3891,17 @@ static void its_vpe_4_1_deschedule(struct 
> its_vpe *vpe,
>   static void its_vpe_4_1_invall(struct its_vpe *vpe)
>   {
>       void __iomem *rdbase;
> +    unsigned long flags;
>       u64 val;
> 
>       val  = GICR_INVALLR_V;
>       val |= FIELD_PREP(GICR_INVALLR_VPEID, vpe->vpe_id);
> 
>       /* Target the redistributor this vPE is currently known on */
> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>       rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
>       gic_write_lpir(val, rdbase + GICR_INVALLR);
> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>   }
> 
>   static int its_vpe_4_1_set_vcpu_affinity(struct irq_data *d, void 
> *vcpu_info)
> @@ -3960,13 +4000,17 @@ static int its_sgi_get_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
>                        enum irqchip_irq_state which, bool *val)
>   {
>       struct its_vpe *vpe = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> -    void __iomem *base = gic_data_rdist_cpu(vpe->col_idx)->rd_base + 
> SZ_128K;
> +    void __iomem *base;
> +    unsigned long flags;
>       u32 count = 1000000;    /* 1s! */
>       u32 status;
> +    int cpu;
> 
>       if (which != IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING)
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
> +    cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    base = gic_data_rdist_cpu(cpu)->rd_base + SZ_128K;
>       writel_relaxed(vpe->vpe_id, base + GICR_VSGIR);
>       do {
>           status = readl_relaxed(base + GICR_VSGIPENDR);
> @@ -3983,6 +4027,7 @@ static int its_sgi_get_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
>       } while(count);
> 
>   out:
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       *val = !!(status & (1 << d->hwirq));
> 
>       return 0;
> @@ -4102,6 +4147,7 @@ static int its_vpe_init(struct its_vpe *vpe)
>           return -ENOMEM;
>       }
> 
> +    raw_spin_lock_init(&vpe->vpe_lock);
>       vpe->vpe_id = vpe_id;
>       vpe->vpt_page = vpt_page;
>       if (gic_rdists->has_rvpeid)
> diff --git a/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h 
> b/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> index 46c167a6349f..fc43a63875a3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> +++ b/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> @@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ struct its_vpe {
>           };
>       };
> 
> +    raw_spinlock_t        vpe_lock;
>       /*
>        * This collection ID is used to indirect the target
>        * redistributor for this VPE. The ID itself isn't involved in

I'm not sure if it's good enough, it may gets much clearer after
splitting.


Thanks,
Zenghui


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Robert Richter <rrichter@marvell.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state SGI callbacks
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:11:46 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19a7c193f0e4b97343e822a35f0911ed@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 2020/2/18 23:31, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c 
> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> index 7656b353a95f..0ed286dba827 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ struct event_lpi_map {
>       u16            *col_map;
>       irq_hw_number_t        lpi_base;
>       int            nr_lpis;
> -    raw_spinlock_t        vlpi_lock;
> +    raw_spinlock_t        map_lock;

So we use map_lock to protect both LPI's and VLPI's mapping affinity of
a device, and use vpe_lock to protect vPE's affinity, OK.

>       struct its_vm        *vm;
>       struct its_vlpi_map    *vlpi_maps;
>       int            nr_vlpis;
> @@ -240,15 +240,33 @@ static struct its_vlpi_map *get_vlpi_map(struct 
> irq_data *d)
>       return NULL;
>   }
> 
> -static int irq_to_cpuid(struct irq_data *d)
> +static int irq_to_cpuid_lock(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long *flags)
>   {
> -    struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> +    int cpu;
> 
> -    if (map)
> -        return map->vpe->col_idx;
> +    if (map) {
> +        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&map->vpe->vpe_lock, *flags);
> +        cpu = map->vpe->col_idx;
> +    } else {
> +        struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock, *flags);
> +        cpu = its_dev->event_map.col_map[its_get_event_id(d)];
> +    }
> 
> -    return its_dev->event_map.col_map[its_get_event_id(d)];
> +    return cpu;
> +}

This helper is correct for normal LPIs and VLPIs, but wrong for per-vPE
IRQ (doorbell) and vSGIs. irq_data_get_irq_chip_data() gets confused by
both of them.

> +
> +static void irq_to_cpuid_unlock(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long flags)
> +{
> +    struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> +
> +    if (map) {
> +        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&map->vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
> +    } else {
> +        struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock, flags);
> +    }
>   }

The same problem for this helper.

> 
>   static struct its_collection *valid_col(struct its_collection *col)
> @@ -1384,6 +1402,8 @@ static void direct_lpi_inv(struct irq_data *d)
>   {
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
>       void __iomem *rdbase;
> +    unsigned long flags;
> +    int cpu;
>       u64 val;
> 
>       if (map) {
> @@ -1399,10 +1419,12 @@ static void direct_lpi_inv(struct irq_data *d)
>       }
> 
>       /* Target the redistributor this LPI is currently routed to */
> -    rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, irq_to_cpuid(d))->rd_base;
> +    cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>       gic_write_lpir(val, rdbase + GICR_INVLPIR);
> 
>       wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>   }
> 
>   static void lpi_update_config(struct irq_data *d, u8 clr, u8 set)
> @@ -1471,11 +1493,11 @@ static void its_unmask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>   static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask 
> *mask_val,
>                   bool force)
>   {
> -    unsigned int cpu;
>       const struct cpumask *cpu_mask = cpu_online_mask;
>       struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       struct its_collection *target_col;
> -    u32 id = its_get_event_id(d);
> +    unsigned int from, cpu;
> +    unsigned long flags;
> 
>       /* A forwarded interrupt should use irq_set_vcpu_affinity */
>       if (irqd_is_forwarded_to_vcpu(d))
> @@ -1496,12 +1518,16 @@ static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, 
> const struct cpumask *mask_val,
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
>       /* don't set the affinity when the target cpu is same as current 
> one */
> -    if (cpu != its_dev->event_map.col_map[id]) {
> +    from = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    if (cpu != from) {
> +        u32 id = its_get_event_id(d);
> +
>           target_col = &its_dev->its->collections[cpu];
>           its_send_movi(its_dev, target_col, id);
>           its_dev->event_map.col_map[id] = cpu;
>           irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
>       }
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
> 
>       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>   }
> @@ -1636,7 +1662,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_map(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       if (!info->map)
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       if (!its_dev->event_map.vm) {
>           struct its_vlpi_map *maps;
> @@ -1685,7 +1711,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_map(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       }
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -1695,7 +1721,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_get(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map;
>       int ret = 0;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> 
> @@ -1708,7 +1734,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_get(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       *info->map = *map;
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -1718,7 +1744,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_unmap(struct irq_data *d)
>       u32 event = its_get_event_id(d);
>       int ret = 0;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       if (!its_dev->event_map.vm || !irqd_is_forwarded_to_vcpu(d)) {
>           ret = -EINVAL;
> @@ -1748,7 +1774,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_unmap(struct irq_data *d)
>       }
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -3193,7 +3219,7 @@ static struct its_device *its_create_device(struct 
> its_node *its, u32 dev_id,
>       dev->event_map.col_map = col_map;
>       dev->event_map.lpi_base = lpi_base;
>       dev->event_map.nr_lpis = nr_lpis;
> -    raw_spin_lock_init(&dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock_init(&dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       dev->device_id = dev_id;
>       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev->entry);
> 
> @@ -3560,6 +3586,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>   {
>       struct its_vpe *vpe = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       int from, cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val);
> +    unsigned long flags;
> 
>       /*
>        * Changing affinity is mega expensive, so let's be as lazy as
> @@ -3567,6 +3594,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>        * into the proxy device, we need to move the doorbell
>        * interrupt to its new location.
>        */
> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>       if (vpe->col_idx == cpu)
>           goto out;
> 
> @@ -3586,6 +3614,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
> 
>   out:
>       irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
> 
>       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>   }
> @@ -3695,11 +3724,15 @@ static void its_vpe_send_inv(struct irq_data *d)
> 
>       if (gic_rdists->has_direct_lpi) {
>           void __iomem *rdbase;
> +        unsigned long flags;
> +        int cpu;
> 
>           /* Target the redistributor this VPE is currently known on */
> -        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
> +        cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>           gic_write_lpir(d->parent_data->hwirq, rdbase + GICR_INVLPIR);
>           wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
> +        irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       } else {
>           its_vpe_send_cmd(vpe, its_send_inv);
>       }

Do we really need to grab the vpe_lock for those which are belong to
the same irqchip with its_vpe_set_affinity()? The IRQ core code should
already ensure the mutual exclusion among them, wrong?

> @@ -3735,14 +3768,18 @@ static int its_vpe_set_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
> 
>       if (gic_rdists->has_direct_lpi) {
>           void __iomem *rdbase;
> +        unsigned long flags;
> +        int cpu;
> 
> -        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
> +        cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>           if (state) {
>               gic_write_lpir(vpe->vpe_db_lpi, rdbase + GICR_SETLPIR);
>           } else {
>               gic_write_lpir(vpe->vpe_db_lpi, rdbase + GICR_CLRLPIR);
>               wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
>           }
> +        irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       } else {
>           if (state)
>               its_vpe_send_cmd(vpe, its_send_int);
> @@ -3854,14 +3891,17 @@ static void its_vpe_4_1_deschedule(struct 
> its_vpe *vpe,
>   static void its_vpe_4_1_invall(struct its_vpe *vpe)
>   {
>       void __iomem *rdbase;
> +    unsigned long flags;
>       u64 val;
> 
>       val  = GICR_INVALLR_V;
>       val |= FIELD_PREP(GICR_INVALLR_VPEID, vpe->vpe_id);
> 
>       /* Target the redistributor this vPE is currently known on */
> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>       rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
>       gic_write_lpir(val, rdbase + GICR_INVALLR);
> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>   }
> 
>   static int its_vpe_4_1_set_vcpu_affinity(struct irq_data *d, void 
> *vcpu_info)
> @@ -3960,13 +4000,17 @@ static int its_sgi_get_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
>                        enum irqchip_irq_state which, bool *val)
>   {
>       struct its_vpe *vpe = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> -    void __iomem *base = gic_data_rdist_cpu(vpe->col_idx)->rd_base + 
> SZ_128K;
> +    void __iomem *base;
> +    unsigned long flags;
>       u32 count = 1000000;    /* 1s! */
>       u32 status;
> +    int cpu;
> 
>       if (which != IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING)
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
> +    cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    base = gic_data_rdist_cpu(cpu)->rd_base + SZ_128K;
>       writel_relaxed(vpe->vpe_id, base + GICR_VSGIR);
>       do {
>           status = readl_relaxed(base + GICR_VSGIPENDR);
> @@ -3983,6 +4027,7 @@ static int its_sgi_get_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
>       } while(count);
> 
>   out:
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       *val = !!(status & (1 << d->hwirq));
> 
>       return 0;
> @@ -4102,6 +4147,7 @@ static int its_vpe_init(struct its_vpe *vpe)
>           return -ENOMEM;
>       }
> 
> +    raw_spin_lock_init(&vpe->vpe_lock);
>       vpe->vpe_id = vpe_id;
>       vpe->vpt_page = vpt_page;
>       if (gic_rdists->has_rvpeid)
> diff --git a/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h 
> b/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> index 46c167a6349f..fc43a63875a3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> +++ b/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> @@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ struct its_vpe {
>           };
>       };
> 
> +    raw_spinlock_t        vpe_lock;
>       /*
>        * This collection ID is used to indirect the target
>        * redistributor for this VPE. The ID itself isn't involved in

I'm not sure if it's good enough, it may gets much clearer after
splitting.


Thanks,
Zenghui

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
	Robert Richter <rrichter@marvell.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state SGI callbacks
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:11:46 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19a7c193f0e4b97343e822a35f0911ed@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 2020/2/18 23:31, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c 
> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> index 7656b353a95f..0ed286dba827 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ struct event_lpi_map {
>       u16            *col_map;
>       irq_hw_number_t        lpi_base;
>       int            nr_lpis;
> -    raw_spinlock_t        vlpi_lock;
> +    raw_spinlock_t        map_lock;

So we use map_lock to protect both LPI's and VLPI's mapping affinity of
a device, and use vpe_lock to protect vPE's affinity, OK.

>       struct its_vm        *vm;
>       struct its_vlpi_map    *vlpi_maps;
>       int            nr_vlpis;
> @@ -240,15 +240,33 @@ static struct its_vlpi_map *get_vlpi_map(struct 
> irq_data *d)
>       return NULL;
>   }
> 
> -static int irq_to_cpuid(struct irq_data *d)
> +static int irq_to_cpuid_lock(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long *flags)
>   {
> -    struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> +    int cpu;
> 
> -    if (map)
> -        return map->vpe->col_idx;
> +    if (map) {
> +        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&map->vpe->vpe_lock, *flags);
> +        cpu = map->vpe->col_idx;
> +    } else {
> +        struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock, *flags);
> +        cpu = its_dev->event_map.col_map[its_get_event_id(d)];
> +    }
> 
> -    return its_dev->event_map.col_map[its_get_event_id(d)];
> +    return cpu;
> +}

This helper is correct for normal LPIs and VLPIs, but wrong for per-vPE
IRQ (doorbell) and vSGIs. irq_data_get_irq_chip_data() gets confused by
both of them.

> +
> +static void irq_to_cpuid_unlock(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long flags)
> +{
> +    struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> +
> +    if (map) {
> +        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&map->vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
> +    } else {
> +        struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock, flags);
> +    }
>   }

The same problem for this helper.

> 
>   static struct its_collection *valid_col(struct its_collection *col)
> @@ -1384,6 +1402,8 @@ static void direct_lpi_inv(struct irq_data *d)
>   {
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map = get_vlpi_map(d);
>       void __iomem *rdbase;
> +    unsigned long flags;
> +    int cpu;
>       u64 val;
> 
>       if (map) {
> @@ -1399,10 +1419,12 @@ static void direct_lpi_inv(struct irq_data *d)
>       }
> 
>       /* Target the redistributor this LPI is currently routed to */
> -    rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, irq_to_cpuid(d))->rd_base;
> +    cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>       gic_write_lpir(val, rdbase + GICR_INVLPIR);
> 
>       wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>   }
> 
>   static void lpi_update_config(struct irq_data *d, u8 clr, u8 set)
> @@ -1471,11 +1493,11 @@ static void its_unmask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>   static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask 
> *mask_val,
>                   bool force)
>   {
> -    unsigned int cpu;
>       const struct cpumask *cpu_mask = cpu_online_mask;
>       struct its_device *its_dev = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       struct its_collection *target_col;
> -    u32 id = its_get_event_id(d);
> +    unsigned int from, cpu;
> +    unsigned long flags;
> 
>       /* A forwarded interrupt should use irq_set_vcpu_affinity */
>       if (irqd_is_forwarded_to_vcpu(d))
> @@ -1496,12 +1518,16 @@ static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, 
> const struct cpumask *mask_val,
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
>       /* don't set the affinity when the target cpu is same as current 
> one */
> -    if (cpu != its_dev->event_map.col_map[id]) {
> +    from = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    if (cpu != from) {
> +        u32 id = its_get_event_id(d);
> +
>           target_col = &its_dev->its->collections[cpu];
>           its_send_movi(its_dev, target_col, id);
>           its_dev->event_map.col_map[id] = cpu;
>           irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
>       }
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
> 
>       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>   }
> @@ -1636,7 +1662,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_map(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       if (!info->map)
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       if (!its_dev->event_map.vm) {
>           struct its_vlpi_map *maps;
> @@ -1685,7 +1711,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_map(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       }
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -1695,7 +1721,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_get(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       struct its_vlpi_map *map;
>       int ret = 0;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       map = get_vlpi_map(d);
> 
> @@ -1708,7 +1734,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_get(struct irq_data *d, struct 
> its_cmd_info *info)
>       *info->map = *map;
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -1718,7 +1744,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_unmap(struct irq_data *d)
>       u32 event = its_get_event_id(d);
>       int ret = 0;
> 
> -    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
> 
>       if (!its_dev->event_map.vm || !irqd_is_forwarded_to_vcpu(d)) {
>           ret = -EINVAL;
> @@ -1748,7 +1774,7 @@ static int its_vlpi_unmap(struct irq_data *d)
>       }
> 
>   out:
> -    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_unlock(&its_dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       return ret;
>   }
> 
> @@ -3193,7 +3219,7 @@ static struct its_device *its_create_device(struct 
> its_node *its, u32 dev_id,
>       dev->event_map.col_map = col_map;
>       dev->event_map.lpi_base = lpi_base;
>       dev->event_map.nr_lpis = nr_lpis;
> -    raw_spin_lock_init(&dev->event_map.vlpi_lock);
> +    raw_spin_lock_init(&dev->event_map.map_lock);
>       dev->device_id = dev_id;
>       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev->entry);
> 
> @@ -3560,6 +3586,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>   {
>       struct its_vpe *vpe = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>       int from, cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val);
> +    unsigned long flags;
> 
>       /*
>        * Changing affinity is mega expensive, so let's be as lazy as
> @@ -3567,6 +3594,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>        * into the proxy device, we need to move the doorbell
>        * interrupt to its new location.
>        */
> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>       if (vpe->col_idx == cpu)
>           goto out;
> 
> @@ -3586,6 +3614,7 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
> 
>   out:
>       irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
> 
>       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>   }
> @@ -3695,11 +3724,15 @@ static void its_vpe_send_inv(struct irq_data *d)
> 
>       if (gic_rdists->has_direct_lpi) {
>           void __iomem *rdbase;
> +        unsigned long flags;
> +        int cpu;
> 
>           /* Target the redistributor this VPE is currently known on */
> -        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
> +        cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>           gic_write_lpir(d->parent_data->hwirq, rdbase + GICR_INVLPIR);
>           wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
> +        irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       } else {
>           its_vpe_send_cmd(vpe, its_send_inv);
>       }

Do we really need to grab the vpe_lock for those which are belong to
the same irqchip with its_vpe_set_affinity()? The IRQ core code should
already ensure the mutual exclusion among them, wrong?

> @@ -3735,14 +3768,18 @@ static int its_vpe_set_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
> 
>       if (gic_rdists->has_direct_lpi) {
>           void __iomem *rdbase;
> +        unsigned long flags;
> +        int cpu;
> 
> -        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
> +        cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +        rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, cpu)->rd_base;
>           if (state) {
>               gic_write_lpir(vpe->vpe_db_lpi, rdbase + GICR_SETLPIR);
>           } else {
>               gic_write_lpir(vpe->vpe_db_lpi, rdbase + GICR_CLRLPIR);
>               wait_for_syncr(rdbase);
>           }
> +        irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       } else {
>           if (state)
>               its_vpe_send_cmd(vpe, its_send_int);
> @@ -3854,14 +3891,17 @@ static void its_vpe_4_1_deschedule(struct 
> its_vpe *vpe,
>   static void its_vpe_4_1_invall(struct its_vpe *vpe)
>   {
>       void __iomem *rdbase;
> +    unsigned long flags;
>       u64 val;
> 
>       val  = GICR_INVALLR_V;
>       val |= FIELD_PREP(GICR_INVALLR_VPEID, vpe->vpe_id);
> 
>       /* Target the redistributor this vPE is currently known on */
> +    raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>       rdbase = per_cpu_ptr(gic_rdists->rdist, vpe->col_idx)->rd_base;
>       gic_write_lpir(val, rdbase + GICR_INVALLR);
> +    raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vpe->vpe_lock, flags);
>   }
> 
>   static int its_vpe_4_1_set_vcpu_affinity(struct irq_data *d, void 
> *vcpu_info)
> @@ -3960,13 +4000,17 @@ static int its_sgi_get_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
>                        enum irqchip_irq_state which, bool *val)
>   {
>       struct its_vpe *vpe = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> -    void __iomem *base = gic_data_rdist_cpu(vpe->col_idx)->rd_base + 
> SZ_128K;
> +    void __iomem *base;
> +    unsigned long flags;
>       u32 count = 1000000;    /* 1s! */
>       u32 status;
> +    int cpu;
> 
>       if (which != IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING)
>           return -EINVAL;
> 
> +    cpu = irq_to_cpuid_lock(d, &flags);
> +    base = gic_data_rdist_cpu(cpu)->rd_base + SZ_128K;
>       writel_relaxed(vpe->vpe_id, base + GICR_VSGIR);
>       do {
>           status = readl_relaxed(base + GICR_VSGIPENDR);
> @@ -3983,6 +4027,7 @@ static int its_sgi_get_irqchip_state(struct 
> irq_data *d,
>       } while(count);
> 
>   out:
> +    irq_to_cpuid_unlock(d, flags);
>       *val = !!(status & (1 << d->hwirq));
> 
>       return 0;
> @@ -4102,6 +4147,7 @@ static int its_vpe_init(struct its_vpe *vpe)
>           return -ENOMEM;
>       }
> 
> +    raw_spin_lock_init(&vpe->vpe_lock);
>       vpe->vpe_id = vpe_id;
>       vpe->vpt_page = vpt_page;
>       if (gic_rdists->has_rvpeid)
> diff --git a/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h 
> b/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> index 46c167a6349f..fc43a63875a3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> +++ b/include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v4.h
> @@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ struct its_vpe {
>           };
>       };
> 
> +    raw_spinlock_t        vpe_lock;
>       /*
>        * This collection ID is used to indirect the target
>        * redistributor for this VPE. The ID itself isn't involved in

I'm not sure if it's good enough, it may gets much clearer after
splitting.


Thanks,
Zenghui


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-02-20  3:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 142+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-14 14:57 [PATCH v4 00/20] irqchip/gic-v4: GICv4.1 architecture support Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 01/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Skip absent CPUs while iterating over redistributors Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-17  9:11   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-17  9:11     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-17  9:11     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 02/20] irqchip/gic-v3: Use SGIs without active state if offered Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-17  9:18   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-17  9:18     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-17  9:18     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 03/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Advertise support v4.1 to KVM Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-17  9:09   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-17  9:09     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-17  9:09     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 04/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Map the ITS SGIR register page Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-20  3:17   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:17     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:17     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 05/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb skeletal VSGI irqchip Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-20  3:21   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:21     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:21     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 06/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add initial SGI configuration Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  7:25   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  7:25     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  7:25     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  9:46     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  9:46       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  9:46       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-20  3:25       ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:25         ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:25         ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 07/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb mask/unmask SGI callbacks Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-20  3:32   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:32     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:32     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state " Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  7:00   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  7:00     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  7:00     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  9:27     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  9:27       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  9:27       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18 15:31       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18 15:31         ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18 15:31         ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-19 11:50         ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-19 11:50           ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-19 11:50           ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-19 15:18           ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-19 15:18             ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-19 15:18             ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:11         ` Zenghui Yu [this message]
2020-02-20  3:11           ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:11           ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-28 19:37           ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 19:37             ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 19:37             ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-01 19:00             ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-01 19:00               ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-01 19:00               ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-02  8:18               ` Zenghui Yu
2020-03-02  8:18                 ` Zenghui Yu
2020-03-02  8:18                 ` Zenghui Yu
2020-03-02 12:09                 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-02 12:09                   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-02 12:09                   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-02 14:21                   ` Bill Barrow
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 09/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb set_vcpu_affinity " Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-20  3:37   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:37     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:37     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-28 19:00     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 19:00       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 19:00       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 10/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Move doorbell management to the GICv4 abstraction layer Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 11/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add VSGI allocation/teardown Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 12/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add VSGI property setup Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 13/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Eagerly vmap vPEs Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 14/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Let doorbells be auto-enabled Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Add direct injection capability to SGI registers Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  8:46   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  8:46     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  8:46     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-18  9:41     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  9:41       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18  9:41       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 16/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Allow SGIs to switch between HW and SW interrupts Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-20  3:55   ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:55     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-20  3:55     ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-28 19:16     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 19:16       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 19:16       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-03-02  2:40       ` Zenghui Yu
2020-03-02  2:40         ` Zenghui Yu
2020-03-02  2:40         ` Zenghui Yu
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 17/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Plumb SGI implementation selection in the distributor Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 18/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Reload VLPI configuration on distributor enable/disable Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 19/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Allow non-trapping WFI when using HW SGIs Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 20/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Expose HW-based SGIs in debugfs Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-14 14:57   ` Marc Zyngier

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=3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com \
    --to=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
    --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=rrichter@marvell.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.