* [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one
@ 2016-03-10 14:10 Quan Xu
2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization Quan Xu
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Quan Xu @ 2016-03-10 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
Cc: Kevin Tian, Feng Wu, Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper, Dario Faggioli,
Suravee Suthikulpanit, Quan Xu, Keir Fraser
This patch set makes the pcidevs_lock a recursive one, as pcidevs_lock is
going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush
timed out. It is a prereq patch set for Patch:'VT-d Device-TLB flush issue'.
In detail:
1. Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization
pcidevs_lock doesn't require interrupts to be disabled while being acquired.
However there remains an exception in AMD IOMMU code, where the lock is
acquired with interrupt disabled. This inconsistency might lead to deadlock.
The fix is straightforward to use spin_lock instead. Also interrupt has been
enabled when this function is invoked, so we're sure consistency around
pcidevs_lock can be guaranteed after this fix.
2. Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one.
pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS device,
when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out.
CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
CC: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
CC: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
CC: Feng Wu <feng.wu@intel.com>
CC: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
CC: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
--Changes in v4:
* Enhance changelogs.
* Rebase against 0aa1330aac92.
Quan Xu (2):
IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization
IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one.
xen/arch/x86/domctl.c | 8 +--
xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c | 4 +-
xen/arch/x86/irq.c | 8 +--
xen/arch/x86/msi.c | 16 ++---
xen/arch/x86/pci.c | 4 +-
xen/arch/x86/physdev.c | 16 ++---
xen/common/sysctl.c | 4 +-
xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c | 9 ++-
xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c | 2 +-
xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c | 4 +-
xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c | 2 +-
xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c | 14 ++---
xen/drivers/video/vga.c | 4 +-
xen/include/xen/pci.h | 5 +-
15 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 87 deletions(-)
--
1.9.1
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization 2016-03-10 14:10 [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu @ 2016-03-10 14:10 ` Quan Xu 2016-03-11 0:24 ` Tian, Kevin 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu 2016-03-16 2:39 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] " Xu, Quan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Quan Xu @ 2016-03-10 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Kevin Tian, Dario Faggioli, Jan Beulich, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Quan Xu pcidevs_lock doesn't require interrupts to be disabled while being acquired. However there remains an exception in AMD IOMMU code, where the lock is acquired with interrupt disabled. This inconsistency might lead to deadlock. The fix is straightforward to use spin_lock instead. Also interrupt has been enabled when this function is invoked, so we're sure consistency around pcidevs_lock can be guaranteed after this fix. Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> CC: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> CC: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> CC: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> --- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c index d90a2d2..a400497 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c @@ -778,7 +778,6 @@ static bool_t __init set_iommu_interrupt_handler(struct amd_iommu *iommu) { int irq, ret; hw_irq_controller *handler; - unsigned long flags; u16 control; irq = create_irq(NUMA_NO_NODE); @@ -788,10 +787,10 @@ static bool_t __init set_iommu_interrupt_handler(struct amd_iommu *iommu) return 0; } - spin_lock_irqsave(&pcidevs_lock, flags); + spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); iommu->msi.dev = pci_get_pdev(iommu->seg, PCI_BUS(iommu->bdf), PCI_DEVFN2(iommu->bdf)); - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pcidevs_lock, flags); + spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); if ( !iommu->msi.dev ) { AMD_IOMMU_DEBUG("IOMMU: no pdev for %04x:%02x:%02x.%u\n", -- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization Quan Xu @ 2016-03-11 0:24 ` Tian, Kevin 2016-03-11 1:40 ` Xu, Quan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Tian, Kevin @ 2016-03-11 0:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu, Quan, xen-devel; +Cc: Dario Faggioli, Jan Beulich, Suravee Suthikulpanit > From: Xu, Quan > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 10:10 PM > > pcidevs_lock doesn't require interrupts to be disabled while being acquired. > However there remains an exception in AMD IOMMU code, where the lock is > acquired with interrupt disabled. This inconsistency might lead to deadlock. > > The fix is straightforward to use spin_lock instead. Also interrupt has been > enabled when this function is invoked, so we're sure consistency around > pcidevs_lock can be guaranteed after this fix. > > Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> > CC: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> > CC: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> > CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > CC: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization 2016-03-11 0:24 ` Tian, Kevin @ 2016-03-11 1:40 ` Xu, Quan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-11 1:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tian, Kevin, xen-devel; +Cc: Dario Faggioli, Jan Beulich, Suravee Suthikulpanit On March 11, 2016 8:24am, <Tian, Kevin> wrote: > > From: Xu, Quan > > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 10:10 PM > > > > pcidevs_lock doesn't require interrupts to be disabled while being acquired. > > However there remains an exception in AMD IOMMU code, where the lock > > is acquired with interrupt disabled. This inconsistency might lead to deadlock. > > > > The fix is straightforward to use spin_lock instead. Also interrupt > > has been enabled when this function is invoked, so we're sure > > consistency around pcidevs_lock can be guaranteed after this fix. > > > > Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> > > Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> > > CC: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> > > CC: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> > > CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > CC: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> Kevin, thanks!! Quan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. 2016-03-10 14:10 [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization Quan Xu @ 2016-03-10 14:10 ` Quan Xu 2016-03-10 14:32 ` Jan Beulich 2016-03-16 2:39 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] " Xu, Quan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Quan Xu @ 2016-03-10 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Kevin Tian, Feng Wu, Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper, Dario Faggioli, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Quan Xu, Keir Fraser The pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out. Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> CC: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> CC: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> CC: Feng Wu <feng.wu@intel.com> CC: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> CC: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> --- xen/arch/x86/domctl.c | 8 +-- xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c | 4 +- xen/arch/x86/irq.c | 8 +-- xen/arch/x86/msi.c | 16 ++--- xen/arch/x86/pci.c | 4 +- xen/arch/x86/physdev.c | 16 ++--- xen/common/sysctl.c | 4 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c | 8 +-- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c | 2 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c | 4 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++++----------- xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c | 2 +- xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c | 14 ++--- xen/drivers/video/vga.c | 4 +- xen/include/xen/pci.h | 5 +- 15 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c index 55aecdc..b34a295 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c @@ -472,9 +472,9 @@ long arch_do_domctl( ret = -ESRCH; if ( iommu_enabled ) { - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); ret = pt_irq_create_bind(d, bind); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); } if ( ret < 0 ) printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "pt_irq_create_bind failed (%ld) for dom%d\n", @@ -497,9 +497,9 @@ long arch_do_domctl( if ( iommu_enabled ) { - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); ret = pt_irq_destroy_bind(d, bind); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); } if ( ret < 0 ) printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "pt_irq_destroy_bind failed (%ld) for dom%d\n", diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c index 499151e..b41aba5 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c @@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ int msixtbl_pt_register(struct domain *d, struct pirq *pirq, uint64_t gtable) struct msixtbl_entry *entry, *new_entry; int r = -EINVAL; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&d->event_lock)); if ( !has_vlapic(d) ) @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ void msixtbl_pt_unregister(struct domain *d, struct pirq *pirq) struct pci_dev *pdev; struct msixtbl_entry *entry; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&d->event_lock)); if ( !has_vlapic(d) ) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/irq.c b/xen/arch/x86/irq.c index 1228568..78e4263 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/irq.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/irq.c @@ -1960,7 +1960,7 @@ int map_domain_pirq( struct pci_dev *pdev; unsigned int nr = 0; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); ret = -ENODEV; if ( !cpu_has_apic ) @@ -2105,7 +2105,7 @@ int unmap_domain_pirq(struct domain *d, int pirq) if ( (pirq < 0) || (pirq >= d->nr_pirqs) ) return -EINVAL; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&d->event_lock)); info = pirq_info(d, pirq); @@ -2231,7 +2231,7 @@ void free_domain_pirqs(struct domain *d) { int i; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); spin_lock(&d->event_lock); for ( i = 0; i < d->nr_pirqs; i++ ) @@ -2239,7 +2239,7 @@ void free_domain_pirqs(struct domain *d) unmap_domain_pirq(d, i); spin_unlock(&d->event_lock); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); } static void dump_irqs(unsigned char key) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/msi.c b/xen/arch/x86/msi.c index 5a481f6..a6018a2 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/msi.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/msi.c @@ -694,7 +694,7 @@ static int msi_capability_init(struct pci_dev *dev, u8 slot = PCI_SLOT(dev->devfn); u8 func = PCI_FUNC(dev->devfn); - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); pos = pci_find_cap_offset(seg, bus, slot, func, PCI_CAP_ID_MSI); if ( !pos ) return -ENODEV; @@ -852,7 +852,7 @@ static int msix_capability_init(struct pci_dev *dev, u8 func = PCI_FUNC(dev->devfn); bool_t maskall = msix->host_maskall; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); control = pci_conf_read16(seg, bus, slot, func, msix_control_reg(pos)); /* @@ -1042,7 +1042,7 @@ static int __pci_enable_msi(struct msi_info *msi, struct msi_desc **desc) struct pci_dev *pdev; struct msi_desc *old_desc; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); pdev = pci_get_pdev(msi->seg, msi->bus, msi->devfn); if ( !pdev ) return -ENODEV; @@ -1103,7 +1103,7 @@ static int __pci_enable_msix(struct msi_info *msi, struct msi_desc **desc) u8 func = PCI_FUNC(msi->devfn); struct msi_desc *old_desc; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); pdev = pci_get_pdev(msi->seg, msi->bus, msi->devfn); pos = pci_find_cap_offset(msi->seg, msi->bus, slot, func, PCI_CAP_ID_MSIX); if ( !pdev || !pos ) @@ -1205,7 +1205,7 @@ int pci_prepare_msix(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, bool_t off) if ( !pos ) return -ENODEV; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(seg, bus, devfn); if ( !pdev ) rc = -ENODEV; @@ -1224,7 +1224,7 @@ int pci_prepare_msix(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, bool_t off) rc = msix_capability_init(pdev, pos, NULL, NULL, multi_msix_capable(control)); } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return rc; } @@ -1235,7 +1235,7 @@ int pci_prepare_msix(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, bool_t off) */ int pci_enable_msi(struct msi_info *msi, struct msi_desc **desc) { - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); if ( !use_msi ) return -EPERM; @@ -1351,7 +1351,7 @@ int pci_restore_msi_state(struct pci_dev *pdev) unsigned int type = 0, pos = 0; u16 control = 0; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); if ( !use_msi ) return -EOPNOTSUPP; diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/pci.c b/xen/arch/x86/pci.c index 4b87cab..a9decd4 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/pci.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pci.c @@ -88,13 +88,13 @@ int pci_conf_write_intercept(unsigned int seg, unsigned int bdf, if ( reg < 64 || reg >= 256 ) return 0; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(seg, PCI_BUS(bdf), PCI_DEVFN2(bdf)); if ( pdev ) rc = pci_msi_conf_write_intercept(pdev, reg, size, data); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return rc; } diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/physdev.c b/xen/arch/x86/physdev.c index 57b7800..1cb9b58 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/physdev.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/physdev.c @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ int physdev_map_pirq(domid_t domid, int type, int *index, int *pirq_p, goto free_domain; } - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); /* Verify or get pirq. */ spin_lock(&d->event_lock); pirq = domain_irq_to_pirq(d, irq); @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ int physdev_map_pirq(domid_t domid, int type, int *index, int *pirq_p, done: spin_unlock(&d->event_lock); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( ret != 0 ) switch ( type ) { @@ -275,11 +275,11 @@ int physdev_unmap_pirq(domid_t domid, int pirq) goto free_domain; } - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); spin_lock(&d->event_lock); ret = unmap_domain_pirq(d, pirq); spin_unlock(&d->event_lock); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); free_domain: rcu_unlock_domain(d); @@ -689,10 +689,10 @@ ret_t do_physdev_op(int cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg) if ( copy_from_guest(&restore_msi, arg, 1) != 0 ) break; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(0, restore_msi.bus, restore_msi.devfn); ret = pdev ? pci_restore_msi_state(pdev) : -ENODEV; - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); break; } @@ -704,10 +704,10 @@ ret_t do_physdev_op(int cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg) if ( copy_from_guest(&dev, arg, 1) != 0 ) break; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(dev.seg, dev.bus, dev.devfn); ret = pdev ? pci_restore_msi_state(pdev) : -ENODEV; - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); break; } diff --git a/xen/common/sysctl.c b/xen/common/sysctl.c index 58162f5..253b7c8 100644 --- a/xen/common/sysctl.c +++ b/xen/common/sysctl.c @@ -426,7 +426,7 @@ long do_sysctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_sysctl_t) u_sysctl) break; } - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(dev.seg, dev.bus, dev.devfn); if ( !pdev ) node = XEN_INVALID_DEV; @@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ long do_sysctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_sysctl_t) u_sysctl) node = XEN_INVALID_NODE_ID; else node = pdev->node; - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( copy_to_guest_offset(ti->nodes, i, &node, 1) ) { diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c index a400497..4536106 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c @@ -673,9 +673,9 @@ void parse_ppr_log_entry(struct amd_iommu *iommu, u32 entry[]) bus = PCI_BUS(device_id); devfn = PCI_DEVFN2(device_id); - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_real_pdev(iommu->seg, bus, devfn); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( pdev ) guest_iommu_add_ppr_log(pdev->domain, entry); @@ -787,10 +787,10 @@ static bool_t __init set_iommu_interrupt_handler(struct amd_iommu *iommu) return 0; } - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); iommu->msi.dev = pci_get_pdev(iommu->seg, PCI_BUS(iommu->bdf), PCI_DEVFN2(iommu->bdf)); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( !iommu->msi.dev ) { AMD_IOMMU_DEBUG("IOMMU: no pdev for %04x:%02x:%02x.%u\n", diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c index 78862c9..9d91dfc 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c @@ -593,7 +593,7 @@ static int update_paging_mode(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn) hd->arch.paging_mode = level; hd->arch.root_table = new_root; - if ( !spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock) ) + if ( !pcidevs_is_locked() ) AMD_IOMMU_DEBUG("%s Try to access pdev_list " "without aquiring pcidevs_lock.\n", __func__); diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c index c1c0b6b..dc3bfab 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static void amd_iommu_setup_domain_device( spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iommu->lock, flags); - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); if ( pci_ats_device(iommu->seg, bus, pdev->devfn) && !pci_ats_enabled(iommu->seg, bus, pdev->devfn) ) @@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ void amd_iommu_disable_domain_device(struct domain *domain, } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iommu->lock, flags); - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); if ( devfn == pdev->devfn && pci_ats_device(iommu->seg, bus, devfn) && diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c index 62b311b..e07821e 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c @@ -48,7 +48,28 @@ struct pci_seg { } bus2bridge[MAX_BUSES]; }; -spinlock_t pcidevs_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED; +static spinlock_t _pcidevs_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED; + +void pcidevs_lock(void) +{ + spin_lock_recursive(&_pcidevs_lock); +} + +void pcidevs_unlock(void) +{ + spin_unlock_recursive(&_pcidevs_lock); +} + +bool_t pcidevs_is_locked(void) +{ + return !!spin_is_locked(&_pcidevs_lock); +} + +bool_t pcidevs_trylock(void) +{ + return !!spin_trylock_recursive(&_pcidevs_lock); +} + static struct radix_tree_root pci_segments; static inline struct pci_seg *get_pseg(u16 seg) @@ -412,14 +433,14 @@ int __init pci_hide_device(int bus, int devfn) struct pci_dev *pdev; int rc = -ENOMEM; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = alloc_pdev(get_pseg(0), bus, devfn); if ( pdev ) { _pci_hide_device(pdev); rc = 0; } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return rc; } @@ -456,7 +477,7 @@ struct pci_dev *pci_get_pdev(int seg, int bus, int devfn) struct pci_seg *pseg = get_pseg(seg); struct pci_dev *pdev = NULL; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); ASSERT(seg != -1 || bus == -1); ASSERT(bus != -1 || devfn == -1); @@ -581,9 +602,9 @@ int pci_add_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, pdev_type = "extended function"; else if (info->is_virtfn) { - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(seg, info->physfn.bus, info->physfn.devfn); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( !pdev ) pci_add_device(seg, info->physfn.bus, info->physfn.devfn, NULL, node); @@ -601,7 +622,7 @@ int pci_add_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, ret = -ENOMEM; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pseg = alloc_pseg(seg); if ( !pseg ) goto out; @@ -703,7 +724,7 @@ int pci_add_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, pci_enable_acs(pdev); out: - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( !ret ) { printk(XENLOG_DEBUG "PCI add %s %04x:%02x:%02x.%u\n", pdev_type, @@ -735,7 +756,7 @@ int pci_remove_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn) if ( !pseg ) return -ENODEV; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); list_for_each_entry ( pdev, &pseg->alldevs_list, alldevs_list ) if ( pdev->bus == bus && pdev->devfn == devfn ) { @@ -749,7 +770,7 @@ int pci_remove_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn) break; } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return ret; } @@ -807,11 +828,11 @@ int pci_release_devices(struct domain *d) u8 bus, devfn; int ret; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); ret = pci_clean_dpci_irqs(d); if ( ret ) { - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return ret; } while ( (pdev = pci_get_pdev_by_domain(d, -1, -1, -1)) ) @@ -823,7 +844,7 @@ int pci_release_devices(struct domain *d) d->domain_id, pdev->seg, bus, PCI_SLOT(devfn), PCI_FUNC(devfn)); } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return 0; } @@ -920,7 +941,7 @@ void pci_check_disable_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn) s_time_t now = NOW(); u16 cword; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_real_pdev(seg, bus, devfn); if ( pdev ) { @@ -931,7 +952,7 @@ void pci_check_disable_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn) if ( ++pdev->fault.count < PT_FAULT_THRESHOLD ) pdev = NULL; } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( !pdev ) return; @@ -988,9 +1009,9 @@ int __init scan_pci_devices(void) { int ret; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); ret = pci_segments_iterate(_scan_pci_devices, NULL); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return ret; } @@ -1054,17 +1075,17 @@ static int __hwdom_init _setup_hwdom_pci_devices(struct pci_seg *pseg, void *arg if ( iommu_verbose ) { - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); process_pending_softirqs(); - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); } } if ( !iommu_verbose ) { - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); process_pending_softirqs(); - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); } } @@ -1076,9 +1097,9 @@ void __hwdom_init setup_hwdom_pci_devices( { struct setup_hwdom ctxt = { .d = d, .handler = handler }; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pci_segments_iterate(_setup_hwdom_pci_devices, &ctxt); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); } #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI @@ -1206,9 +1227,9 @@ static int _dump_pci_devices(struct pci_seg *pseg, void *arg) static void dump_pci_devices(unsigned char ch) { printk("==== PCI devices ====\n"); - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pci_segments_iterate(_dump_pci_devices, NULL); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); } static int __init setup_dump_pcidevs(void) @@ -1242,7 +1263,7 @@ int iommu_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev) if ( !pdev->domain ) return -EINVAL; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); hd = domain_hvm_iommu(pdev->domain); if ( !iommu_enabled || !hd->platform_ops ) @@ -1271,7 +1292,7 @@ int iommu_enable_device(struct pci_dev *pdev) if ( !pdev->domain ) return -EINVAL; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); hd = domain_hvm_iommu(pdev->domain); if ( !iommu_enabled || !hd->platform_ops || @@ -1320,9 +1341,9 @@ static int device_assigned(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn) { struct pci_dev *pdev; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev_by_domain(hardware_domain, seg, bus, devfn); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return pdev ? 0 : -EBUSY; } @@ -1344,13 +1365,13 @@ static int assign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, u32 flag) p2m_get_hostp2m(d)->global_logdirty)) ) return -EXDEV; - if ( !spin_trylock(&pcidevs_lock) ) + if ( !pcidevs_trylock() ) return -ERESTART; rc = iommu_construct(d); if ( rc ) { - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return rc; } @@ -1381,7 +1402,7 @@ static int assign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, u32 flag) done: if ( !has_arch_pdevs(d) && need_iommu(d) ) iommu_teardown(d); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return rc; } @@ -1396,7 +1417,7 @@ int deassign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn) if ( !iommu_enabled || !hd->platform_ops ) return -EINVAL; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); pdev = pci_get_pdev_by_domain(d, seg, bus, devfn); if ( !pdev ) return -ENODEV; @@ -1451,7 +1472,7 @@ static int iommu_get_device_group( group_id = ops->get_device_group_id(seg, bus, devfn); - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); for_each_pdev( d, pdev ) { if ( (pdev->seg != seg) || @@ -1470,14 +1491,14 @@ static int iommu_get_device_group( if ( unlikely(copy_to_guest_offset(buf, i, &bdf, 1)) ) { - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return -1; } i++; } } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); return i; } @@ -1605,9 +1626,9 @@ int iommu_do_pci_domctl( bus = PCI_BUS(machine_sbdf); devfn = PCI_DEVFN2(machine_sbdf); - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); ret = deassign_device(d, seg, bus, devfn); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( ret ) printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "deassign %04x:%02x:%02x.%u from dom%d failed (%d)\n", diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c index 0ee3fb2..f5e3f49 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c @@ -984,7 +984,7 @@ int pi_update_irte(const struct vcpu *v, const struct pirq *pirq, spin_unlock_irq(&desc->lock); - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); /* * FIXME: For performance reasons we should store the 'iommu' pointer in diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c index 8022702..8409100 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c @@ -1282,7 +1282,7 @@ int domain_context_mapping_one( u16 seg = iommu->intel->drhd->segment; int agaw; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); spin_lock(&iommu->lock); maddr = bus_to_context_maddr(iommu, bus); context_entries = (struct context_entry *)map_vtd_domain_page(maddr); @@ -1424,7 +1424,7 @@ static int domain_context_mapping( if ( !drhd ) return -ENODEV; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); switch ( pdev->type ) { @@ -1506,7 +1506,7 @@ int domain_context_unmap_one( u64 maddr; int iommu_domid; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); spin_lock(&iommu->lock); maddr = bus_to_context_maddr(iommu, bus); @@ -1816,7 +1816,7 @@ static int rmrr_identity_mapping(struct domain *d, bool_t map, struct mapped_rmrr *mrmrr; struct hvm_iommu *hd = domain_hvm_iommu(d); - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); ASSERT(rmrr->base_address < rmrr->end_address); /* @@ -1881,7 +1881,7 @@ static int intel_iommu_add_device(u8 devfn, struct pci_dev *pdev) u16 bdf; int ret, i; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pcidevs_lock)); + ASSERT(pcidevs_is_locked()); if ( !pdev->domain ) return -EINVAL; @@ -2109,7 +2109,7 @@ static void __hwdom_init setup_hwdom_rmrr(struct domain *d) u16 bdf; int ret, i; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); for_each_rmrr_device ( rmrr, bdf, i ) { /* @@ -2123,7 +2123,7 @@ static void __hwdom_init setup_hwdom_rmrr(struct domain *d) dprintk(XENLOG_ERR VTDPREFIX, "IOMMU: mapping reserved region failed\n"); } - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); } int __init intel_vtd_setup(void) diff --git a/xen/drivers/video/vga.c b/xen/drivers/video/vga.c index 40e5963..61c6b13 100644 --- a/xen/drivers/video/vga.c +++ b/xen/drivers/video/vga.c @@ -117,9 +117,9 @@ void __init video_endboot(void) const struct pci_dev *pdev; u8 b = bus, df = devfn, sb; - spin_lock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_lock(); pdev = pci_get_pdev(0, bus, devfn); - spin_unlock(&pcidevs_lock); + pcidevs_unlock(); if ( !pdev || pci_conf_read16(0, bus, PCI_SLOT(devfn), PCI_FUNC(devfn), diff --git a/xen/include/xen/pci.h b/xen/include/xen/pci.h index a5aef55..6d1e91d 100644 --- a/xen/include/xen/pci.h +++ b/xen/include/xen/pci.h @@ -94,7 +94,10 @@ struct pci_dev { * interrupt handling related (the mask bit register). */ -extern spinlock_t pcidevs_lock; +void pcidevs_lock(void); +void pcidevs_unlock(void); +bool_t pcidevs_is_locked(void); +bool_t pcidevs_trylock(void); bool_t pci_known_segment(u16 seg); bool_t pci_device_detect(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 dev, u8 func); -- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu @ 2016-03-10 14:32 ` Jan Beulich 2016-03-10 14:38 ` Dario Faggioli 2016-03-11 1:33 ` Xu, Quan 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2016-03-10 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Quan Xu Cc: Kevin Tian, Feng Wu, Andrew Cooper, Dario Faggioli, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Keir Fraser >>> On 10.03.16 at 15:10, <quan.xu@intel.com> wrote: > The pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS > device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out. > > Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> > Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. 2016-03-10 14:32 ` Jan Beulich @ 2016-03-10 14:38 ` Dario Faggioli 2016-03-11 1:38 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-11 1:33 ` Xu, Quan 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dario Faggioli @ 2016-03-10 14:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich, Quan Xu Cc: Kevin Tian, Keir Fraser, Andrew Cooper, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Feng Wu [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 809 bytes --] On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 07:32 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 10.03.16 at 15:10, <quan.xu@intel.com> wrote: > > The pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS > > device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out. > > > > Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> > > Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > I remember giving this already, but anyway (for what it's worth and if I'm still in time): Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) [-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. 2016-03-10 14:38 ` Dario Faggioli @ 2016-03-11 1:38 ` Xu, Quan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-11 1:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dario Faggioli Cc: Tian, Kevin, Wu, Feng, Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Keir Fraser On March 10, 2016 10:39pm, <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 07:32 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > On 10.03.16 at 15:10, <quan.xu@intel.com> wrote: > > > The pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS > > > device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> > > > Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > > I remember giving this already, but anyway (for what it's worth and if I'm still in > time): > > Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> > Dario, thanks!! Quan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. 2016-03-10 14:32 ` Jan Beulich 2016-03-10 14:38 ` Dario Faggioli @ 2016-03-11 1:33 ` Xu, Quan 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-11 1:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich Cc: Tian, Kevin, Wu, Feng, Andrew Cooper, Dario Faggioli, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Keir Fraser On March 10, 2016 10:32pm, <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >>> On 10.03.16 at 15:10, <quan.xu@intel.com> wrote: > > The pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS > > device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out. > > > > Signed-off-by: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com> > > Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Jan, thanks!! I would send out my remaining patches till next week. Quan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one 2016-03-10 14:10 [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization Quan Xu 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu @ 2016-03-16 2:39 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-16 8:39 ` Dario Faggioli 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-16 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Tian, Kevin, Wu, Feng, Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper, Dario Faggioli, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Keir Fraser Hi, __iiuc__, this patch set is ready for staging branch. if yes, could you help me merge it into staging branch? Then, I would send out remaining patch sets on it. otherwise, there are some conflicts to it. Thanks. Quan On March 10, 2016 10:10pm, <quan.xu@Intel.com> wrote: > This patch set makes the pcidevs_lock a recursive one, as pcidevs_lock is going > to be recursively taken for hiding ATS device, when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed > out. It is a prereq patch set for Patch:'VT-d Device-TLB flush issue'. > > In detail: > 1. Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization > > pcidevs_lock doesn't require interrupts to be disabled while being acquired. > However there remains an exception in AMD IOMMU code, where the lock is > acquired with interrupt disabled. This inconsistency might lead to deadlock. > > The fix is straightforward to use spin_lock instead. Also interrupt has been > enabled when this function is invoked, so we're sure consistency around > pcidevs_lock can be guaranteed after this fix. > > 2. Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. > > pcidevs_lock is going to be recursively taken for hiding ATS device, > when VT-d Device-TLB flush timed out. > > > > CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org> > CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > CC: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> > CC: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> > CC: Feng Wu <feng.wu@intel.com> > CC: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > CC: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> > > --Changes in v4: > * Enhance changelogs. > * Rebase against 0aa1330aac92. > > Quan Xu (2): > IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization > IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one. > > xen/arch/x86/domctl.c | 8 +-- > xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c | 4 +- > xen/arch/x86/irq.c | 8 +-- > xen/arch/x86/msi.c | 16 ++--- > xen/arch/x86/pci.c | 4 +- > xen/arch/x86/physdev.c | 16 ++--- > xen/common/sysctl.c | 4 +- > xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c | 9 ++- > xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c | 2 +- > xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c | 4 +- > xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c | 97 > ++++++++++++++++++----------- > xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c | 2 +- > xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c | 14 ++--- > xen/drivers/video/vga.c | 4 +- > xen/include/xen/pci.h | 5 +- > 15 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 87 deletions(-) > > -- > 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one 2016-03-16 2:39 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] " Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-16 8:39 ` Dario Faggioli 2016-03-16 10:45 ` Jan Beulich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dario Faggioli @ 2016-03-16 8:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu, Quan, Suravee Suthikulpanit Cc: Tian, Kevin, Keir Fraser, Andrew Cooper, xen-devel, Jan Beulich, Wu, Feng [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1719 bytes --] On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 02:39 +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: > Hi, > __iiuc__, this patch set is ready for staging branch. if yes, could > you help me merge it into staging branch? > Well, not yet, AFAICS. In fact, patch 1 touches xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/ and, unless I've missed it, I haven't seen Suravee acking it. Suravee, ping? > Then, I would send out remaining patch sets on it. otherwise, there > are some conflicts to it. Thanks. > I totally understand, but that should not necessarily hold back you from working on it and posting it. You just do your own development with this patches here applied and then, when posting the series containing (**only***) the remaining patches, you specify _clearly_, in the cover letter, what other series/patches are a prerequisite. That way, people can start reviewing your remaining patches. This is not something that can, IMO, always be done. It highly depends on how the interdependent patch series actually look like. In fact, if either one (or both!) is (are) too big or too complex, it's probably useless (no one would look at the second one anyway) and unfair (it's going to be a lot of work for the reviewer). But in this case, I think it would be just fine. Having a git branch somewhere with the both the series applied would also help a lot, but only if that is possible (and again, in this case, it's probably not too big of a deal anyway). Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) [-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one 2016-03-16 8:39 ` Dario Faggioli @ 2016-03-16 10:45 ` Jan Beulich 2016-03-17 1:39 ` Xu, Quan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2016-03-16 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dario Faggioli, Quan Xu Cc: Kevin Tian, Keir Fraser, Andrew Cooper, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Feng Wu >>> On 16.03.16 at 09:39, <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 02:39 +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: >> __iiuc__, this patch set is ready for staging branch. if yes, could >> you help me merge it into staging branch? >> > Well, not yet, AFAICS. > > In fact, patch 1 touches xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/ and, unless I've > missed it, I haven't seen Suravee acking it. > > Suravee, ping? I've applied this yesterday without waiting for Suravee, as the change was obvious enough, and the discussion around it long enough for him to chime in if he objected. Quan - before sending such pings, please be sure to actually check the staging branch. And generally Dario is right - if anything, you should have pinged Suravee for his missing ack, and not everyone (i.e. the list). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one 2016-03-16 10:45 ` Jan Beulich @ 2016-03-17 1:39 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-17 2:07 ` Dario Faggioli 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-17 1:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich, Dario Faggioli Cc: Tian, Kevin, Keir Fraser, Andrew Cooper, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Wu, Feng On March 16, 2016 6:45pm, <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >>> On 16.03.16 at 09:39, <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 02:39 +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: > Quan - before sending such pings, please be sure to actually check the staging > branch. And generally Dario is right - if anything, you should have pinged > Suravee for his missing ack, and not everyone (i.e. the list). > Yes, you are right. I will follow it. Before I send out pings, I have checked it on the http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=summary, and I can't find this patch set. Quan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one 2016-03-17 1:39 ` Xu, Quan @ 2016-03-17 2:07 ` Dario Faggioli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Dario Faggioli @ 2016-03-17 2:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu, Quan, Jan Beulich Cc: Tian, Kevin, Keir Fraser, Andrew Cooper, xen-devel, Suravee Suthikulpanit, Wu, Feng [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1318 bytes --] On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 01:39 +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: > On March 16, 2016 6:45pm, <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > > > Quan - before sending such pings, please be sure to actually check > > the staging > > branch. And generally Dario is right - if anything, you should have > > pinged > > Suravee for his missing ack, and not everyone (i.e. the list). > > > Yes, you are right. I will follow it. > Before I send out pings, I have checked it on the http://xenbits.xen. > org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=summary, > and I can't find this patch set. > Right, but that is the 'master' branch. As you probably know, patches are not committed to master, they're committed to 'staging', and then move to 'master' when they pass OSSTest's gate. As you said yourself in your ping request, what you wanted to know was whether the patches were already in the 'staging' branch, which, if you want to use the web interface, is here: http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/staging (and has the patches). Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) [-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-03-17 2:07 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-03-10 14:10 [PATCH v4 0/2] Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Fix a bug found in AMD IOMMU initialization Quan Xu 2016-03-11 0:24 ` Tian, Kevin 2016-03-11 1:40 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-10 14:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] IOMMU/spinlock: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one Quan Xu 2016-03-10 14:32 ` Jan Beulich 2016-03-10 14:38 ` Dario Faggioli 2016-03-11 1:38 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-11 1:33 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-16 2:39 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] " Xu, Quan 2016-03-16 8:39 ` Dario Faggioli 2016-03-16 10:45 ` Jan Beulich 2016-03-17 1:39 ` Xu, Quan 2016-03-17 2:07 ` Dario Faggioli
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).