From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alex.williamson@redhat.com (Alex Williamson) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 11:20:05 -0600 Subject: [RFC v5 06/13] VFIO: platform: add vfio_external_{mask|is_active|set_automasked} In-Reply-To: <1426776951-24901-7-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> References: <1426776951-24901-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <1426776951-24901-7-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> Message-ID: <1427822405.5567.163.camel@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 15:55 +0100, Eric Auger wrote: > Introduces 3 new external functions aimed at doining some actions > on VFIO platform devices: > - mask a VFIO IRQ > - get the active status of a VFIO IRQ (active at interrupt > controller level or masked by the level-sensitive automasking). > - change the automasked property and the VFIO handler > > Note there is no way to discriminate between user-space > masking and automasked handler masking. As a consequence, is_active > will return true in case the IRQ was masked by the user-space. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger > > --- > > V4: creation > --- > drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/vfio.h | 14 ++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 57 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > index 8eb65c1..49994cb 100644 > --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > @@ -231,6 +231,49 @@ static int vfio_set_trigger(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, int index, > return 0; > } > > +void vfio_external_mask(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, int index) > +{ > + vfio_platform_mask(&vdev->irqs[index]); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_external_mask); > + > +bool vfio_external_is_active(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, int index) > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + struct vfio_platform_irq *irq = &vdev->irqs[index]; > + bool active, masked, outstanding; > + int ret; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->lock, flags); > + > + ret = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->hwirq, IRQCHIP_STATE_ACTIVE, &active); > + BUG_ON(ret); > + masked = irq->masked; > + outstanding = active || masked; > + > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags); > + return outstanding; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_external_is_active); > + > +void vfio_external_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, > + int index, bool automasked) > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + struct vfio_platform_irq *irq = &vdev->irqs[index]; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->lock, flags); > + if (automasked) { > + irq->flags |= VFIO_IRQ_INFO_AUTOMASKED; > + irq->handler = vfio_automasked_irq_handler; > + } else { > + irq->flags &= ~VFIO_IRQ_INFO_AUTOMASKED; > + irq->handler = vfio_irq_handler; > + } > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_external_set_automasked); > + This is where the abstraction breaks down. These are vfio_external_foo() interfaces, yet they assume a specific type of device, a vfio platform device. Either the name should reflect that or they should be hosted in vfio-core with a callout to the device specific implementations. Can we make kvm-vfio deal only in struct vfio_device and struct device? > static int vfio_platform_set_irq_trigger(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, > unsigned index, unsigned start, > unsigned count, uint32_t flags, > diff --git a/include/linux/vfio.h b/include/linux/vfio.h > index b18c38f..7aa6330 100644 > --- a/include/linux/vfio.h > +++ b/include/linux/vfio.h > @@ -105,6 +105,20 @@ extern struct vfio_device *vfio_device_get_external_user(struct file *filep); > extern void vfio_device_put_external_user(struct vfio_device *vdev); > extern struct device *vfio_external_base_device(struct vfio_device *vdev); > > +struct vfio_platform_device; > +extern void vfio_external_mask(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, int index); > +/* > + * returns whether the VFIO IRQ is active: > + * true if not yet deactivated at interrupt controller level or if > + * automasked (level sensitive IRQ). Unfortunately there is no way to > + * discriminate between handler auto-masking and user-space masking > + */ > +extern bool vfio_external_is_active(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, > + int index); > + > +extern void vfio_external_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev, > + int index, bool automasked); > + > struct pci_dev; > #ifdef CONFIG_EEH > extern void vfio_spapr_pci_eeh_open(struct pci_dev *pdev);