From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] xen/arm: observe itargets setting in
 vgic_enable_irqs and vgic_disable_irqs
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:45:52 +0100
Message-ID: <539976D0.4050305@linaro.org>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1406111607450.13771@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<1402504032-13267-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1402504032-13267-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Cc: julien.grall@citrix.com, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Stefano,

On 11/06/14 17:27, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> +static struct vcpu *_vgic_get_target_vcpu(struct vcpu *v, unsigned int irq)

[..]

> +struct vcpu *vgic_get_target_vcpu(struct vcpu *v, unsigned int irq)

Can you add comment explaining what are the differences between these 2 
functions?

AFAIU, the first one is assuming the rank lock is taken. If so, I would 
add an ASSERT in it. I would avoid people misuse the 2 functions.

>       case GICD_ISPENDR ... GICD_ISPENDRN:
> @@ -589,12 +625,23 @@ static int vgic_distr_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v, mmio_info_t *info)
>           if ( dabt.size != 0 && dabt.size != 2 ) goto bad_width;
>           rank = vgic_rank_offset(v, 8, gicd_reg - GICD_ITARGETSR);
>           if ( rank == NULL) goto write_ignore;
> +        /* 8-bit vcpu mask for this domain */

BUG_ON(v->domain->max_vcpus > 8)? Just for enforcement.

> +        tr = (1 << v->domain->max_vcpus) - 1;
> +        tr = tr | (tr << 8) | (tr << 16) | (tr << 24);
> +        tr &= *r;
> +        /* ignore zero writes */
> +        if ( !tr )
> +            goto write_ignore;
> +        if ( dabt.size == 2 &&
> +            !((tr & 0xff) && (tr & (0xff << 8)) &&
> +             (tr & (0xff << 16)) && (tr & (0xff << 24))))
> +            goto write_ignore;

I quite difficult to understand this check. Does this check is only for 
word-access?

AFAIU, with byte-access it's possible to write 0 in itargets. For this 
case, the register may contain some 1 out of the byte offset.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall