From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Auger Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/4] chip/vgic adaptations for forwarded irq Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 11:39:06 +0200 Message-ID: <554B32BA.2000107@linaro.org> References: <1423642857-24240-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <20150506142748.GC6796@cbox> <554A3425.7070909@linaro.org> <20150507091748.GA25885@cbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: eric.auger@st.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, patches@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, andre.przywara@arm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org To: Christoffer Dall Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150507091748.GA25885@cbox> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 05/07/2015 11:17 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 05:32:53PM +0200, Eric Auger wrote: >> On 05/06/2015 04:27 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> Hi Eric, >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:20:53AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote: >>>> This series proposes some fixes that appeared to be necessary >>>> to integrate IRQ forwarding in KVM/VFIO. >>>> >>>> - deactivation of the forwarded IRQ in irq_disabled case >>>> - a specific handling of forwarded IRQ into the VGIC state machine. >>>> - deactivation of physical IRQ and unforwarding on vgic destruction >>>> - rb_tree lock in vgic.c >>>> >>>> Integrated pieces can be found at >>>> ssh://git.linaro.org/people/eric.auger/linux.git >>>> on branch irqfd_integ_v9 >>>> >>> What are the dependencies for this at this point? >>> >>> I assume it relies at least on the split EOI/priority drop changes? >> >> Yes it now only depends on split EOI/priority drop changes since >> "genirq: Saving/restoring the irqchip state of an irq line" now is >> upstreamed. >> >>> >>> Are you going to respin this when there are newer versions of the >>> dependencies out, or what are the plans? >> >> Yes I will respin according to new versions. I am currently using a >> rebased version of Marc's original RFC "ARM: Forwarding physical >> interrupts to a guest VM" (http://lwn.net/Articles/603514/) which is a >> superset of [PATCH] genirq: Add support for priority-drop/deactivate >> interrupt controllers. >> > > ok, once there's movement on the dependency and you respin, I'll review > the rest of this in detail. OK thanks Eric > > -Christoffer > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: eric.auger@linaro.org (Eric Auger) Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 11:39:06 +0200 Subject: [RFC v2 0/4] chip/vgic adaptations for forwarded irq In-Reply-To: <20150507091748.GA25885@cbox> References: <1423642857-24240-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <20150506142748.GC6796@cbox> <554A3425.7070909@linaro.org> <20150507091748.GA25885@cbox> Message-ID: <554B32BA.2000107@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 05/07/2015 11:17 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 05:32:53PM +0200, Eric Auger wrote: >> On 05/06/2015 04:27 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> Hi Eric, >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:20:53AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote: >>>> This series proposes some fixes that appeared to be necessary >>>> to integrate IRQ forwarding in KVM/VFIO. >>>> >>>> - deactivation of the forwarded IRQ in irq_disabled case >>>> - a specific handling of forwarded IRQ into the VGIC state machine. >>>> - deactivation of physical IRQ and unforwarding on vgic destruction >>>> - rb_tree lock in vgic.c >>>> >>>> Integrated pieces can be found at >>>> ssh://git.linaro.org/people/eric.auger/linux.git >>>> on branch irqfd_integ_v9 >>>> >>> What are the dependencies for this at this point? >>> >>> I assume it relies at least on the split EOI/priority drop changes? >> >> Yes it now only depends on split EOI/priority drop changes since >> "genirq: Saving/restoring the irqchip state of an irq line" now is >> upstreamed. >> >>> >>> Are you going to respin this when there are newer versions of the >>> dependencies out, or what are the plans? >> >> Yes I will respin according to new versions. I am currently using a >> rebased version of Marc's original RFC "ARM: Forwarding physical >> interrupts to a guest VM" (http://lwn.net/Articles/603514/) which is a >> superset of [PATCH] genirq: Add support for priority-drop/deactivate >> interrupt controllers. >> > > ok, once there's movement on the dependency and you respin, I'll review > the rest of this in detail. OK thanks Eric > > -Christoffer >