Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1571308 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-02-01 09:10 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-02-01 11:10 +0100 |
| Articles | 5 — 3 participants |
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.
Re: [RFC v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: Update the physical timer interrupt level Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> - 2017-02-01 09:10 +0100
Re: [RFC v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: Update the physical timer interrupt level Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> - 2017-02-01 09:50 +0100
Re: [RFC v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: Update the physical timer interrupt level Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> - 2017-02-01 11:10 +0100
Re: [RFC v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: Update the physical timer interrupt level Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> - 2017-02-01 11:20 +0100
Re: [RFC v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: Update the physical timer interrupt level Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> - 2017-02-01 11:10 +0100
| From | Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 09:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC v2 06/10] KVM: arm/arm64: Update the physical timer interrupt level |
| Message-ID | <t5Y9j-3lP-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 03:21:06PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 01:04:56 AM, Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
> > Now that we maintain the EL1 physical timer register states of VMs,
> > update the physical timer interrupt level along with the virtual one.
> >
> > Note that the emulated EL1 physical timer is not mapped to any hardware
> > timer, so we call a proper vgic function.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu>
> > ---
> > virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> > index 0f6e935..3b6bd50 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> > @@ -180,6 +180,21 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
> > WARN_ON(ret);
> > }
> >
> > +static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
> > + struct arch_timer_context *timer)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + BUG_ON(!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm));
>
> Although I've added my fair share of BUG_ON() in the code base, I've
> since reconsidered my position. If we get in a situation where the vgic
> is not initialized, maybe it would be better to just WARN_ON and return
> early rather than killing the whole box. Thoughts?
>
Could we help this series along by saying that since this BUG_ON already
exists in the kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq function, then it just
preserves functionality and it's up to someone else (me) to remove the
BUG_ON from both functions later in life?
Thanks,
-Christoffer
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 09:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t5YM2-3z5-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1571308 |
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Christoffer Dall
<christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 03:21:06PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 01:04:56 AM, Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
>> > Now that we maintain the EL1 physical timer register states of VMs,
>> > update the physical timer interrupt level along with the virtual one.
>> >
>> > Note that the emulated EL1 physical timer is not mapped to any hardware
>> > timer, so we call a proper vgic function.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu>
>> > ---
>> > virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>> > index 0f6e935..3b6bd50 100644
>> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>> > @@ -180,6 +180,21 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
>> > WARN_ON(ret);
>> > }
>> >
>> > +static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
>> > + struct arch_timer_context *timer)
>> > +{
>> > + int ret;
>> > +
>> > + BUG_ON(!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm));
>>
>> Although I've added my fair share of BUG_ON() in the code base, I've
>> since reconsidered my position. If we get in a situation where the vgic
>> is not initialized, maybe it would be better to just WARN_ON and return
>> early rather than killing the whole box. Thoughts?
>>
>
> Could we help this series along by saying that since this BUG_ON already
> exists in the kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq function, then it just
> preserves functionality and it's up to someone else (me) to remove the
> BUG_ON from both functions later in life?
>
Sounds good to me :) Thanks!
> Thanks,
> -Christoffer
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 11:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t601v-4A9-119@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1571333 |
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 03:40:10AM -0500, Jintack Lim wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Christoffer Dall
> <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 03:21:06PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 01:04:56 AM, Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
> >> > Now that we maintain the EL1 physical timer register states of VMs,
> >> > update the physical timer interrupt level along with the virtual one.
> >> >
> >> > Note that the emulated EL1 physical timer is not mapped to any hardware
> >> > timer, so we call a proper vgic function.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu>
> >> > ---
> >> > virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> >> > index 0f6e935..3b6bd50 100644
> >> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> >> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> >> > @@ -180,6 +180,21 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
> >> > WARN_ON(ret);
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > +static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
> >> > + struct arch_timer_context *timer)
> >> > +{
> >> > + int ret;
> >> > +
> >> > + BUG_ON(!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm));
> >>
> >> Although I've added my fair share of BUG_ON() in the code base, I've
> >> since reconsidered my position. If we get in a situation where the vgic
> >> is not initialized, maybe it would be better to just WARN_ON and return
> >> early rather than killing the whole box. Thoughts?
> >>
> >
> > Could we help this series along by saying that since this BUG_ON already
> > exists in the kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq function, then it just
> > preserves functionality and it's up to someone else (me) to remove the
> > BUG_ON from both functions later in life?
> >
>
> Sounds good to me :) Thanks!
>
So just as you thought you were getting off easy...
The reason we now have kvm_timer_update_irq and
kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq is that we have the following two vgic
functions:
kvm_vgic_inject_irq
kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq
But the only difference between the two is what they pass
as the mapped_irq argument to vgic_update_irq_pending.
What about if we just had this as a precursor patch:
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
index 6a084cd..91ecf48 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
@@ -175,7 +175,8 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level)
timer->irq.level = new_level;
trace_kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu->vcpu_id, timer->irq.irq,
timer->irq.level);
- ret = kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->vcpu_id,
+
+ ret = kvm_vgic_inject_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->vcpu_id,
timer->irq.irq,
timer->irq.level);
WARN_ON(ret);
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
index dea12df..4c87fd0 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -336,8 +336,7 @@ bool vgic_queue_irq_unlock(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
}
static int vgic_update_irq_pending(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
- unsigned int intid, bool level,
- bool mapped_irq)
+ unsigned int intid, bool level)
{
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
struct vgic_irq *irq;
@@ -357,11 +356,6 @@ static int vgic_update_irq_pending(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
if (!irq)
return -EINVAL;
- if (irq->hw != mapped_irq) {
- vgic_put_irq(kvm, irq);
- return -EINVAL;
- }
-
spin_lock(&irq->irq_lock);
if (!vgic_validate_injection(irq, level)) {
@@ -399,13 +393,7 @@ static int vgic_update_irq_pending(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
int kvm_vgic_inject_irq(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid, unsigned int intid,
bool level)
{
- return vgic_update_irq_pending(kvm, cpuid, intid, level, false);
-}
-
-int kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid, unsigned int intid,
- bool level)
-{
- return vgic_update_irq_pending(kvm, cpuid, intid, level, true);
+ return vgic_update_irq_pending(kvm, cpuid, intid, level);
}
int kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 virt_irq, u32 phys_irq)
That would make this patch simpler. If so, I can send out the above
patch with a proper description.
Thanks,
-Christoffer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 11:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t60b8-4DF-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1571446 |
On 01/02/17 10:07, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 03:40:10AM -0500, Jintack Lim wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Christoffer Dall
>> <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 03:21:06PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 01:04:56 AM, Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>>>> Now that we maintain the EL1 physical timer register states of VMs,
>>>>> update the physical timer interrupt level along with the virtual one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that the emulated EL1 physical timer is not mapped to any hardware
>>>>> timer, so we call a proper vgic function.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>>>> index 0f6e935..3b6bd50 100644
>>>>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>>>> @@ -180,6 +180,21 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
>>>>> WARN_ON(ret);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> +static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
>>>>> + struct arch_timer_context *timer)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + BUG_ON(!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm));
>>>>
>>>> Although I've added my fair share of BUG_ON() in the code base, I've
>>>> since reconsidered my position. If we get in a situation where the vgic
>>>> is not initialized, maybe it would be better to just WARN_ON and return
>>>> early rather than killing the whole box. Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Could we help this series along by saying that since this BUG_ON already
>>> exists in the kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq function, then it just
>>> preserves functionality and it's up to someone else (me) to remove the
>>> BUG_ON from both functions later in life?
>>>
>>
>> Sounds good to me :) Thanks!
>>
>
> So just as you thought you were getting off easy...
>
> The reason we now have kvm_timer_update_irq and
> kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq is that we have the following two vgic
> functions:
>
> kvm_vgic_inject_irq
> kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq
>
> But the only difference between the two is what they pass
> as the mapped_irq argument to vgic_update_irq_pending.
>
> What about if we just had this as a precursor patch:
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> index 6a084cd..91ecf48 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> @@ -175,7 +175,8 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level)
> timer->irq.level = new_level;
> trace_kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu->vcpu_id, timer->irq.irq,
> timer->irq.level);
> - ret = kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->vcpu_id,
> +
> + ret = kvm_vgic_inject_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->vcpu_id,
> timer->irq.irq,
> timer->irq.level);
> WARN_ON(ret);
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
> index dea12df..4c87fd0 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
> @@ -336,8 +336,7 @@ bool vgic_queue_irq_unlock(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
> }
>
> static int vgic_update_irq_pending(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
> - unsigned int intid, bool level,
> - bool mapped_irq)
> + unsigned int intid, bool level)
> {
> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
> struct vgic_irq *irq;
> @@ -357,11 +356,6 @@ static int vgic_update_irq_pending(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
> if (!irq)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - if (irq->hw != mapped_irq) {
> - vgic_put_irq(kvm, irq);
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> -
> spin_lock(&irq->irq_lock);
>
> if (!vgic_validate_injection(irq, level)) {
> @@ -399,13 +393,7 @@ static int vgic_update_irq_pending(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
> int kvm_vgic_inject_irq(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid, unsigned int intid,
> bool level)
> {
> - return vgic_update_irq_pending(kvm, cpuid, intid, level, false);
> -}
> -
> -int kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid, unsigned int intid,
> - bool level)
> -{
> - return vgic_update_irq_pending(kvm, cpuid, intid, level, true);
> + return vgic_update_irq_pending(kvm, cpuid, intid, level);
> }
>
> int kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 virt_irq, u32 phys_irq)
>
>
> That would make this patch simpler. If so, I can send out the above
> patch with a proper description.
Indeed. And while you're at it, rename vgic_update_irq_pending to
kvm_vgic_inject_irq, as I don't think we need this simple stub?
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 11:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t601v-4A9-103@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1571308 |
On 01/02/17 08:04, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 03:21:06PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 01:04:56 AM, Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>> Now that we maintain the EL1 physical timer register states of VMs,
>>> update the physical timer interrupt level along with the virtual one.
>>>
>>> Note that the emulated EL1 physical timer is not mapped to any hardware
>>> timer, so we call a proper vgic function.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu>
>>> ---
>>> virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>> index 0f6e935..3b6bd50 100644
>>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>> @@ -180,6 +180,21 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
>>> WARN_ON(ret);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
>>> + struct arch_timer_context *timer)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + BUG_ON(!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm));
>>
>> Although I've added my fair share of BUG_ON() in the code base, I've
>> since reconsidered my position. If we get in a situation where the vgic
>> is not initialized, maybe it would be better to just WARN_ON and return
>> early rather than killing the whole box. Thoughts?
>>
>
> Could we help this series along by saying that since this BUG_ON already
> exists in the kvm_timer_update_mapped_irq function, then it just
> preserves functionality and it's up to someone else (me) to remove the
> BUG_ON from both functions later in life?
Works for me.
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web