From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoffer Dall Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 51/59] KVM: arm/arm64: GICv4: Add doorbell interrupt handling Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 22:58:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20170830205828.GN24522@cbox> References: <20170731172637.29355-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20170731172637.29355-52-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20170828181855.GM24649@cbox> <6d825d0f-eb99-8c9f-77f7-ab313e17a2cd@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Christoffer Dall , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Eric Auger , Shanker Donthineni , Mark Rutland , Shameerali Kolothum Thodi To: Marc Zyngier Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6d825d0f-eb99-8c9f-77f7-ab313e17a2cd@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 04:36:06PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 28/08/17 19:18, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 06:26:29PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >> When a vPE is not running, a VLPI being made pending results in a > >> doorbell interrupt being delivered. Let's handle this interrupt > >> and update the pending_last flag that indicates that VLPIs are > >> pending. The corresponding vcpu is also kicked into action. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > >> --- > >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c > >> index 534d3051a078..6af3cde6d7d4 100644 > >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c > >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c > >> @@ -21,6 +21,19 @@ > >> > >> #include "vgic.h" > >> > >> +static irqreturn_t vgic_v4_doorbell_handler(int irq, void *info) > >> +{ > >> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = info; > >> + > >> + if (!kvm_vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(vcpu)) { > >> + vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v3.its_vpe.pending_last = true; > >> + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_IRQ_PENDING, vcpu); > >> + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > >> + } > > > > Can this ever fire while vgic_v4_init() is running and before te rest of > > the system has been properly initialized with some entertaining results > > to follow? (I'm not sure if spurious doorbell non-resident vPE > > interrupts is a thing or not). > > It could if you only had this patch. The following patch makes sure that > the interrupt does not get enabled at request time, meaning it will only > get enabled when the vcpu will eventually block. > > And yes, spurious doorbells are a real thing. And they suck. > Ah, my abilities to forward read on a patch series are quite poor. Thanks, -Christoffer