[RFC PATCH 2/6] ARM64: perf: Re-enable overflow interrupt from interrupt handler
Will Deacon
will.deacon at arm.com
Wed Aug 6 07:24:39 PDT 2014
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 10:24:11AM +0100, Anup Patel wrote:
> A hypervisor will typically mask the overflow interrupt before
> forwarding it to Guest Linux hence we need to re-enable the overflow
> interrupt after clearing it in Guest Linux. Also, this re-enabling
> of overflow interrupt does not harm in non-virtualized scenarios.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pranavkumar Sawargaonkar <pranavkumar at linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel at linaro.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> index 47dfb8b..19fb140 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> @@ -1076,6 +1076,14 @@ static irqreturn_t armv8pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
> if (!armv8pmu_counter_has_overflowed(pmovsr, idx))
> continue;
>
> + /*
> + * If we are running under a hypervisor such as KVM then
> + * hypervisor will mask the interrupt before forwarding
> + * it to Guest Linux hence re-enable interrupt for the
> + * overflowed counter.
> + */
> + armv8pmu_enable_intens(idx);
> +
Really? This is a giant bodge in the guest to work around short-comings in
the hypervisor. Why can't we fix this properly using something like Marc's
irq forwarding code?
Will
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list