Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] xen/arm: Support SPIs routing

From: Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@codeaurora.org>
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Cc: sstabellini@kernel.org, steve.capper@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] xen/arm: Support SPIs routing
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 13:17:20 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5787D730.60904@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1468513325-29492-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@arm.com>

Hi Julien,

Tested-by: Shanker Donthineni<shankerd@codeaurora.org>

I have tested this patchset on Qualcomm Technologies QDF2XXX server platform without any issue.

On 07/14/2016 11:21 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Currently, Xen does not route SPIs to DOM0 when ACPI is inuse after
> the functionality has been reverted in Xen 4.7 by commit 909bd14.
>
> In the previous approach, the SPIs was routed when DOM0 was writing into
> ISENABLER. However, this has resulted to deadlock (see more details in [1])
> as soon as the IRQ was enabled by DOM0.
>
> We have multiple solutions to route the IRQ:
>      1) Rework route_irq_to_guest to avoid the deadlock
>      2) Route and enable the IRQ outside of the emulation of ISENABLER
>      3) Remove the dependency on the IRQ type in the routing function
>      and route all the unused IRQs during domain building
>      4) Add a new hypercall to let DOM0 routing the IRQ
>
> I think that 1) and 2) are not resilient because route_irq_to_guest may fail
> and there is no way to report this error to the guest (except by killing it).
>
> Furthermore, in solution 2) enabling the interrupt would need to be defer
> until the routing has been done. This would require a lot of code duplication.
>
> Which leave solution 3) and 4). The solution 4) requires to introduce a new
> (or re-use one) stable hypercall. I am not sure why we ruled out this
> solution when we reviewed the ACPI design document.
>
> This patch series is implementing the 3rd solution which defer the IRQ
> type configuration for DOM0 IRQ when ACPI is inuse. However, this will
> slightly increase the memory usage of Xen (54KB).
>
> I am happy to consider any other solutions.
>
> I only tested briefly this patch series, Shanker can you give a try on
> your hardware?
>
> A branch with all the patches can be found here:
>
> git://xenbits.xen.org/people/julieng/xen-unstable.git branch irq-routing-acpi-v2
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> [1] http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-05/msg02633.html
>
> Julien Grall (9):
>    xen/arm: gic: Consolidate the IRQ affinity set in a single place
>    xen/arm: gic: Do not configure affinity during routing
>    xen/arm: gic: split set_irq_properties
>    xen/arm: gic: set_type: Pass the type in parameter rather than in
>      desc->arch.type
>    xen/arm: gic: Document how gic_set_irq_type should be called
>    Revert "xen/arm: warn the user that we cannot route SPIs to Dom0 on
>      ACPI"
>    xen/arm: Allow DOM0 to set the IRQ type
>    xen/arm: acpi: route all unused IRQs to DOM0
>    xen/arm: Fix coding style and update comment in acpi_route_spis
>
>   xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c | 33 +++++++++++++++------------------
>   xen/arch/arm/gic-v2.c       | 28 +++++++++++++---------------
>   xen/arch/arm/gic-v3.c       | 22 ++++++++++------------
>   xen/arch/arm/gic.c          | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>   xen/arch/arm/irq.c          | 17 ++++++++++++++---
>   xen/arch/arm/vgic.c         | 32 ++++++++++++++++++--------------
>   xen/include/asm-arm/gic.h   | 14 ++++++++------
>   xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h   |  6 ++++++
>   8 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
>

-- 
Shanker Donthineni
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel