Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 05/17] arm: gic: Prepare IRQ handler for handling SPIs

[Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>]

Hi Andre,

On 11/8/19 3:42 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
> So far our IRQ handler routine checks that the received IRQ is actually
> the one SGI (IPI) that we are using for our testing.
> 
> To make the IRQ testing routine more versatile, also allow the IRQ to be
> one test SPI (shared interrupt).
> We use the penultimate IRQ of the first SPI group for that purpose.
I don't get the above sentence. What do you mean by group here?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
> ---
>  arm/gic.c | 9 +++++++--
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arm/gic.c b/arm/gic.c
> index eca9188..c909668 100644
> --- a/arm/gic.c
> +++ b/arm/gic.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>  
>  #define IPI_SENDER	1
>  #define IPI_IRQ		1
> +#define SPI_IRQ		(GIC_FIRST_SPI + 30)
>  
>  struct gic {
>  	struct {
> @@ -162,8 +163,12 @@ static void irq_handler(struct pt_regs *regs __unused)
>  
>  	smp_rmb(); /* pairs with wmb in stats_reset */
>  	++acked[smp_processor_id()];
> -	check_ipi_sender(irqstat);
> -	check_irqnr(irqnr, IPI_IRQ);
> +	if (irqnr < GIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS) {
> +		check_ipi_sender(irqstat);
> +		check_irqnr(irqnr, IPI_IRQ);
> +	} else {
> +		check_irqnr(irqnr, SPI_IRQ);
I think I would rather have different handlers per test.
I have rebased the ITS series and I use a different LPI handler there.
I think you shouldn't be obliged to hardcode a specific intid in the
handler.

Can't we have
static void setup_irq(handler_t handler)?

Thanks

Eric

> +	}
>  	smp_wmb(); /* pairs with rmb in check_acked */
>  }
>  
> 

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm