Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1390329
| From | Eric Auger <eric.auger@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 12/18] vfio: Register/unregister irq_bypass_producer |
| Date | 2016-04-28 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rsWcP-5NB-35@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qa597-5y9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qa59a-5y9-57@gated-at.bofh.it> <rshsZ-5r9-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi Alex, On 04/26/2016 10:08 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:29:50 +0800 > Feng Wu <feng.wu@intel.com> wrote: > > @@ -360,6 +361,14 @@ static int vfio_msi_set_vector_signal(struct > vfio_pci_device *vdev, >> return ret; >> } >> >> + vdev->ctx[vector].producer.token = trigger; >> + vdev->ctx[vector].producer.irq = irq; >> + ret = irq_bypass_register_producer(&vdev->ctx[vector].producer); >> + if (unlikely(ret)) >> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, >> + "irq bypass producer (token %p) registeration fails: %d\n", >> + vdev->ctx[vector].producer.token, ret); >> + >> vdev->ctx[vector].trigger = trigger; >> >> return 0; > > Digging back into the IRQ producer/consumer thing, I'm not sure how we > should be handling a failure here, but it turns out that what we have > is pretty sub-optimal. Any sort of testing on AMD hits this dev_info > because kvm_arch_irq_bypass_add_producer() returns -EINVAL without > kvm_x86_ops->update_pi_irte which is only implemented for vmx. Clearly > we don't want to spew confusing error messages for a feature that does > not exist. > > The easiest option is to simply make this error silent, but should > registering a producer/consumer really fail due to a mismatch on the > other end or should the __connect sequence fail silently, which both > ends would know about (if they care) due to the add/del handshake > between them? Perhaps for now we simply need a stable suitable fix to > silence the dev_info above, but longer term, registration shouldn't > fail for mismatches like this. Thoughts? Thanks, Regarding the ARM IRQ forwarding use case, I think it is OK to fail silently. We would fall back to the irqfd standard mechanism. Anyway this series still is waiting for ARM new-vgic dependency to be resolved, as discussed with Christoffer and Marc. Best Regards Eric > > Alex >
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v9 12/18] vfio: Register/unregister irq_bypass_producer Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2016-04-26 22:10 +0200
RE: [PATCH v9 12/18] vfio: Register/unregister irq_bypass_producer "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com> - 2016-04-27 03:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v9 12/18] vfio: Register/unregister irq_bypass_producer Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2016-04-28 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v9 12/18] vfio: Register/unregister irq_bypass_producer Eric Auger <eric.auger@linaro.org> - 2016-04-28 17:40 +0200
csiph-web