Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1217817 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active

Started byChristoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
First post2015-09-02 21:30 +0200
Last post2015-09-02 21:30 +0200
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> - 2015-09-02 21:30 +0200

#1217817 — Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active

FromChristoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Date2015-09-02 21:30 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active
Message-ID<q4lTj-5Xp-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 03:20:59PM +0200, Eric Auger wrote:
> This function returns whether the IRQ is active at irqchip level or
> VFIO masked. If either is true, it is considered the IRQ is active.
> Currently there is no way to differentiate userspace masked IRQ from
> automasked IRQ. There might be false detection of activity. However
> it is currently acceptable to have false detection.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@linaro.org>
> 
> ---
> ---
>  drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
> index a285384..efaee58 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
> @@ -205,6 +205,23 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static int vfio_platform_is_active(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq)
> +{
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	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;

outstanding?

why not just return active || masked ?

-Christoffer

> +
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags);
> +	return outstanding;
> +}
> +
>  static void vfio_platform_irq_bypass_stop(struct irq_bypass_producer *prod)
>  {
>  }
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web