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, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
Robert Richter <rrichter@marvell.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.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 [thread overview]
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...
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-18 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ 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
2020-02-14 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=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--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=suzuki.poulose@arm.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).