From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> To: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Richter <rrichter@marvell.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Add direct injection capability to SGI registers Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 09:41:21 +0000 Message-ID: <fb5cd47ffec8db887d442e1e23ffc0db@kernel.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <5e744173-5d7a-98b7-e44d-d1f8c47b3e3c@huawei.com> On 2020-02-18 08:46, Zenghui Yu wrote: > Hi Marc, > > On 2020/2/14 22:57, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> Most of the GICv3 emulation code that deals with SGIs now has to be >> aware of the v4.1 capabilities in order to benefit from it. >> >> Add such support, keyed on the interrupt having the hw flag set and >> being a SGI. >> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> >> --- >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c | 15 +++++- >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c | 88 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> 2 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c >> b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c >> index ebc218840fc2..de89da76a379 100644 >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c >> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ >> #include <linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v3.h> >> #include <linux/kvm.h> >> #include <linux/kvm_host.h> >> +#include <linux/interrupt.h> >> #include <kvm/iodev.h> >> #include <kvm/arm_vgic.h> >> @@ -942,8 +943,18 @@ void vgic_v3_dispatch_sgi(struct kvm_vcpu >> *vcpu, u64 reg, bool allow_group1) >> * generate interrupts of either group. >> */ >> if (!irq->group || allow_group1) { >> - irq->pending_latch = true; >> - vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags); >> + if (!irq->hw) { >> + irq->pending_latch = true; >> + vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags); >> + } else { >> + /* HW SGI? Ask the GIC to inject it */ >> + int err; >> + err = irq_set_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq, >> + IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, >> + true); >> + WARN_RATELIMIT(err, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq); >> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + } >> } else { >> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> } >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c >> b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c >> index d656ebd5f9d4..0a1fb61e5b89 100644 >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c >> @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ >> #include <linux/bitops.h> >> #include <linux/bsearch.h> >> +#include <linux/interrupt.h> >> +#include <linux/irq.h> >> #include <linux/kvm.h> >> #include <linux/kvm_host.h> >> #include <kvm/iodev.h> >> @@ -59,6 +61,11 @@ unsigned long vgic_mmio_read_group(struct kvm_vcpu >> *vcpu, >> return value; >> } >> +static void vgic_update_vsgi(struct vgic_irq *irq) >> +{ >> + WARN_ON(its_prop_update_vsgi(irq->host_irq, irq->priority, >> irq->group)); >> +} >> + >> void vgic_mmio_write_group(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t addr, >> unsigned int len, unsigned long val) >> { >> @@ -71,7 +78,12 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_group(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, >> gpa_t addr, >> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> irq->group = !!(val & BIT(i)); >> - vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags); >> + if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) { >> + vgic_update_vsgi(irq); >> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + } else { >> + vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags); >> + } >> vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq); >> } >> @@ -113,7 +125,21 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_senable(struct kvm_vcpu >> *vcpu, >> struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, intid + i); >> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> - if (vgic_irq_is_mapped_level(irq)) { >> + if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) { >> + if (!irq->enabled) { >> + struct irq_data *data; >> + >> + irq->enabled = true; >> + data = &irq_to_desc(irq->host_irq)->irq_data; >> + while (irqd_irq_disabled(data)) >> + enable_irq(irq->host_irq); >> + } >> + >> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq); >> + >> + continue; >> + } else if (vgic_irq_is_mapped_level(irq)) { >> bool was_high = irq->line_level; >> /* >> @@ -148,6 +174,8 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_cenable(struct kvm_vcpu >> *vcpu, >> struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, intid + i); >> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid) && irq->enabled) >> + disable_irq_nosync(irq->host_irq); >> irq->enabled = false; >> @@ -167,10 +195,22 @@ unsigned long vgic_mmio_read_pending(struct >> kvm_vcpu *vcpu, >> for (i = 0; i < len * 8; i++) { >> struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, intid + i); >> unsigned long flags; >> + bool val; >> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> - if (irq_is_pending(irq)) >> - value |= (1U << i); >> + if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) { >> + int err; >> + >> + val = false; >> + err = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq, >> + IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, >> + &val); >> + WARN_RATELIMIT(err, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq); >> + } else { >> + val = irq_is_pending(irq); >> + } >> + >> + value |= ((u32)val << i); >> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq); >> @@ -227,6 +267,21 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_spending(struct kvm_vcpu >> *vcpu, >> } >> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + >> + if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) { >> + /* HW SGI? Ask the GIC to inject it */ >> + int err; >> + err = irq_set_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq, >> + IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, >> + true); >> + WARN_RATELIMIT(err, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq); >> + >> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq); >> + >> + continue; >> + } >> + >> if (irq->hw) >> vgic_hw_irq_spending(vcpu, irq, is_uaccess); >> else > > Should we consider taking the GICv4.1 support into uaccess_{read/write} > callbacks for GICR_ISPENDR0 so that userspace can properly save/restore > the pending state of GICv4.1 vSGIs? > > I *think* we can do it because on restoration, GICD_CTLR(.nASSGIreq) is > restored before GICR_ISPENDR0. So we know whether we're restoring > pending for vSGIs, and we can restore it to the HW level if v4.1 is > supported by GIC. Otherwise restore it by the normal way. > > And saving is easy with the get_irqchip_state callback, right? Yes, this should be pretty easy to do, but I haven't completely worked out the ordering dependencies (you're way ahead of me here!). There is still a chance that userspace will play with us trying to set and reset nASSGIreq, so we need to define what is acceptable... > >> @@ -281,6 +336,20 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_cpending(struct kvm_vcpu >> *vcpu, >> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags); >> + if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) { >> + /* HW SGI? Ask the GIC to inject it */ > > "Ask the GIC to clear its pending state" :-) One day, I'll ban copy/paste from my editor... ;-) 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
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-02-14 14:57 [PATCH v4 00/20] irqchip/gic-v4: GICv4.1 architecture support Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 01/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Skip absent CPUs while iterating over redistributors Marc Zyngier 2020-02-17 9:11 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 02/20] irqchip/gic-v3: Use SGIs without active state if offered Marc Zyngier 2020-02-17 9:18 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 03/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Advertise support v4.1 to KVM Marc Zyngier 2020-02-17 9:09 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 04/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Map the ITS SGIR register page Marc Zyngier 2020-02-20 3:17 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 05/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb skeletal VSGI irqchip Marc Zyngier 2020-02-20 3:21 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 06/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add initial SGI configuration Marc Zyngier 2020-02-18 7:25 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-18 9:46 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-02-20 3:25 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 07/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb mask/unmask SGI callbacks Marc Zyngier 2020-02-20 3:32 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 08/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb get/set_irqchip_state " Marc Zyngier 2020-02-18 7:00 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-18 9:27 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-02-18 15:31 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-02-19 11:50 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-19 15:18 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-20 3:11 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-28 19:37 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-03-01 19:00 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-03-02 8:18 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-03-02 12:09 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-03-02 14:21 ` Bill Barrow 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 09/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Plumb set_vcpu_affinity " Marc Zyngier 2020-02-20 3:37 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-28 19:00 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 10/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Move doorbell management to the GICv4 abstraction layer Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 11/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add VSGI allocation/teardown Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 12/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Add VSGI property setup Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 13/20] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Eagerly vmap vPEs Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 14/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Let doorbells be auto-enabled Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Add direct injection capability to SGI registers Marc Zyngier 2020-02-18 8:46 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-18 9:41 ` Marc Zyngier [this message] 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 16/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Allow SGIs to switch between HW and SW interrupts Marc Zyngier 2020-02-20 3:55 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-28 19:16 ` Marc Zyngier 2020-03-02 2:40 ` Zenghui Yu 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 17/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Plumb SGI implementation selection in the distributor Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 18/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Reload VLPI configuration on distributor enable/disable Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 19/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Allow non-trapping WFI when using HW SGIs Marc Zyngier 2020-02-14 14:57 ` [PATCH v4 20/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Expose HW-based SGIs in debugfs Marc Zyngier
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=fb5cd47ffec8db887d442e1e23ffc0db@kernel.org \ --to=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \ --cc=rrichter@marvell.com \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
KVM ARM Archive on lore.kernel.org Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/0 kvmarm/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 kvmarm kvmarm/ https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm \ kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu public-inbox-index kvmarm Example config snippet for mirrors Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/edu.columbia.cs.lists.kvmarm AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git