From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90421C3F2D1 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66FAE246BF for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583089257; bh=lOBsvT2AxEWe7zw8oMvGnToaUWaeiUegRMDNaAgLzRg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=1dgtXEPzHbXuvdqhL3eFr4aFAMHgQCSPVduYu6SHP8bibsqi4jfv09CeHnciEbpOm NRMpc/wXwr1G63sLIgu3o3SrhplECPLmWYCHuHe4lc4udifdt8uqlTq9wastzrTvp8 njBLCSr11c7kDndzvQPdf/qrWigphkNB5dhSxM3U= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726752AbgCATAy (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:54 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:45594 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726146AbgCATAy (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:54 -0500 Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73E20246BA; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583089253; bh=lOBsvT2AxEWe7zw8oMvGnToaUWaeiUegRMDNaAgLzRg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uEaJoRvjqYKI1gpKc+b/lzqN2a8NT6CmeyIdXu1T3ihWUWlsOQ3gyftx/xOg1y6X6 2lfDtMrjvEJpdpZyic9ghUIb9mJ/7b13d6Uy08In/THrIHzAz/IcWdVS58Q/iOhx6O qclaU7+BMmVmvNykILVDUNM34li0M7a6MefwO1Uc= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j8Tpb-009BxH-7Q; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:51 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:51 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Zenghui Yu Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lorenzo Pieralisi , Jason Cooper , Robert Richter , Thomas Gleixner , Eric Auger , James Morse , Julien Thierry , Suzuki K Poulose Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state SGI callbacks In-Reply-To: References: <20200214145736.18550-1-maz@kernel.org> <20200214145736.18550-9-maz@kernel.org> <4b7f71f1-5e7f-e6af-f47d-7ed0d3a8739f@huawei.com> <75597af0d2373ac4d92d8162a1338cbb@kernel.org> <19a7c193f0e4b97343e822a35f0911ed@kernel.org> <3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com> Message-ID: <54c52057161f925c818446953050c951@kernel.org> X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.10 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: yuzenghui@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, jason@lakedaemon.net, rrichter@marvell.com, tglx@linutronix.de, eric.auger@redhat.com, james.morse@arm.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-02-28 19:37, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 2020-02-20 03:11, Zenghui Yu wrote: >> 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? > > I've been trying to think about that, but jet-lag keeps getting in the > way. > I empirically think that you are right, but I need to go and check the > various > code paths to be sure. Hopefully I'll have a bit more brain space next > week. So I slept on it and came back to my senses. The only case we actually need to deal with is when an affinity change impacts *another* interrupt. There is only two instances of this issue: - vLPIs have their *physical* affinity impacted by the affinity of the vPE. Their virtual affinity is of course unchanged, but the physical one becomes important with direct invalidation. Taking a per-VPE lock in such context should address the issue. - vSGIs have the exact same issue, plus the matter of requiring some *extra* one when reading the pending state, which requires a RMW on two different registers. This requires an extra per-RD lock. My original patch was stupidly complex, and the irq_desc lock is perfectly enough to deal with anything that only affects the interrupt state itself. GICv4 + direct invalidation for vLPIs breaks this by bypassing the serialization initially provided by the ITS, as the RD is completely out of band. The per-vPE lock brings back this serialization. I've updated the branch, which seems to run OK on D05. I still need to run the usual tests on the FVP model though. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE614C3F2CD for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37947246BF for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="uEaJoRvj" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 37947246BF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E766E4AEDF; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:57 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Authentication-Results: mm01.cs.columbia.edu (amavisd-new); dkim=softfail (fail, message has been altered) header.i=@kernel.org Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ov5WYAoa56ez; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D82514AF2A; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68464AF2F for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:55 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K1bO0h2lCXEb for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF9F34AF2A for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 14:00:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73E20246BA; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583089253; bh=lOBsvT2AxEWe7zw8oMvGnToaUWaeiUegRMDNaAgLzRg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uEaJoRvjqYKI1gpKc+b/lzqN2a8NT6CmeyIdXu1T3ihWUWlsOQ3gyftx/xOg1y6X6 2lfDtMrjvEJpdpZyic9ghUIb9mJ/7b13d6Uy08In/THrIHzAz/IcWdVS58Q/iOhx6O qclaU7+BMmVmvNykILVDUNM34li0M7a6MefwO1Uc= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j8Tpb-009BxH-7Q; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:51 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:51 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Zenghui Yu Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state SGI callbacks In-Reply-To: References: <20200214145736.18550-1-maz@kernel.org> <20200214145736.18550-9-maz@kernel.org> <4b7f71f1-5e7f-e6af-f47d-7ed0d3a8739f@huawei.com> <75597af0d2373ac4d92d8162a1338cbb@kernel.org> <19a7c193f0e4b97343e822a35f0911ed@kernel.org> <3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com> Message-ID: <54c52057161f925c818446953050c951@kernel.org> X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.10 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: yuzenghui@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, jason@lakedaemon.net, rrichter@marvell.com, tglx@linutronix.de, eric.auger@redhat.com, james.morse@arm.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi , Jason Cooper , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Richter , Thomas Gleixner , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On 2020-02-28 19:37, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 2020-02-20 03:11, Zenghui Yu wrote: >> 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? > > I've been trying to think about that, but jet-lag keeps getting in the > way. > I empirically think that you are right, but I need to go and check the > various > code paths to be sure. Hopefully I'll have a bit more brain space next > week. So I slept on it and came back to my senses. The only case we actually need to deal with is when an affinity change impacts *another* interrupt. There is only two instances of this issue: - vLPIs have their *physical* affinity impacted by the affinity of the vPE. Their virtual affinity is of course unchanged, but the physical one becomes important with direct invalidation. Taking a per-VPE lock in such context should address the issue. - vSGIs have the exact same issue, plus the matter of requiring some *extra* one when reading the pending state, which requires a RMW on two different registers. This requires an extra per-RD lock. My original patch was stupidly complex, and the irq_desc lock is perfectly enough to deal with anything that only affects the interrupt state itself. GICv4 + direct invalidation for vLPIs breaks this by bypassing the serialization initially provided by the ITS, as the RD is completely out of band. The per-vPE lock brings back this serialization. I've updated the branch, which seems to run OK on D05. I still need to run the usual tests on the FVP model though. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EAA9C3F2D1 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:01:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 623C5246BA for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:01:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="ccQDTx82"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="uEaJoRvj" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 623C5246BA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From: Date:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=65HRK/awC0HcZsJxwnQgE+yQz/ZJWeko5zakwLf5r/Q=; b=ccQDTx82pd53okMwrfHoxl8Ig oxK8NKXolG6qGaQvYkKFZMbadkpu7z9gkFTGHPUTKkpd9SIl76c5b51QxTvOq6I7WCuZth6jOPAyB bBnyrXMZ2PUVg1ldjNbK/OZ2qvC69SMII4XckgSp+Ak/BKWZr/AQzYz4vT87bpHxCY0C+EqTB7Shf p5H8XYiyrZQThXmYS1JAidICU6AztauZaGSnOC8CbMCjSnxI0NE759QzYjUbTvMH2RBq/6xxpHc6a 6EESmwE3q6NUn9lAn0egXrxuSZrpW1N/DcDMzqPfNvgtdSX7BV6IhYKdrPoFa5I0nRyqIQglP8gA7 o5mceHYnw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j8Tph-00029U-9A; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:57 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j8Tpe-000298-CW for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:55 +0000 Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73E20246BA; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:00:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583089253; bh=lOBsvT2AxEWe7zw8oMvGnToaUWaeiUegRMDNaAgLzRg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uEaJoRvjqYKI1gpKc+b/lzqN2a8NT6CmeyIdXu1T3ihWUWlsOQ3gyftx/xOg1y6X6 2lfDtMrjvEJpdpZyic9ghUIb9mJ/7b13d6Uy08In/THrIHzAz/IcWdVS58Q/iOhx6O qclaU7+BMmVmvNykILVDUNM34li0M7a6MefwO1Uc= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j8Tpb-009BxH-7Q; Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:51 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 19:00:51 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Zenghui Yu Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state SGI callbacks In-Reply-To: References: <20200214145736.18550-1-maz@kernel.org> <20200214145736.18550-9-maz@kernel.org> <4b7f71f1-5e7f-e6af-f47d-7ed0d3a8739f@huawei.com> <75597af0d2373ac4d92d8162a1338cbb@kernel.org> <19a7c193f0e4b97343e822a35f0911ed@kernel.org> <3d725ede-6631-59fb-1a10-9fb9890f3df6@huawei.com> Message-ID: <54c52057161f925c818446953050c951@kernel.org> X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.10 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: yuzenghui@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, jason@lakedaemon.net, rrichter@marvell.com, tglx@linutronix.de, eric.auger@redhat.com, james.morse@arm.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200301_110054_467889_82AF38FF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.72 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi , Jason Cooper , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Auger , Robert Richter , James Morse , Julien Thierry , Thomas Gleixner , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2020-02-28 19:37, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 2020-02-20 03:11, Zenghui Yu wrote: >> 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? > > I've been trying to think about that, but jet-lag keeps getting in the > way. > I empirically think that you are right, but I need to go and check the > various > code paths to be sure. Hopefully I'll have a bit more brain space next > week. So I slept on it and came back to my senses. The only case we actually need to deal with is when an affinity change impacts *another* interrupt. There is only two instances of this issue: - vLPIs have their *physical* affinity impacted by the affinity of the vPE. Their virtual affinity is of course unchanged, but the physical one becomes important with direct invalidation. Taking a per-VPE lock in such context should address the issue. - vSGIs have the exact same issue, plus the matter of requiring some *extra* one when reading the pending state, which requires a RMW on two different registers. This requires an extra per-RD lock. My original patch was stupidly complex, and the irq_desc lock is perfectly enough to deal with anything that only affects the interrupt state itself. GICv4 + direct invalidation for vLPIs breaks this by bypassing the serialization initially provided by the ITS, as the RD is completely out of band. The per-vPE lock brings back this serialization. I've updated the branch, which seems to run OK on D05. I still need to run the usual tests on the FVP model though. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel