[PATCH v4 18/21] KVM: ARM64: Add PMU overflow interrupt routing

[Shannon Zhao]

On 2015/12/2 0:57, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 01/12/15 16:26, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2015/12/1 23:41, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> The reason is that when guest clear the overflow register, it will trap
>>>>> to kvm and call kvm_pmu_sync_hwstate() as you see above. At this moment,
>>>>> the overflow register is still overflowed(that is some bit is still 1).
>>>>> So We need to use some flag to mark we already inject this interrupt.
>>>>> And if during guest handling the overflow, there is a new overflow
>>>>> happening, the pmu->irq_pending will be set ture by
>>>>> kvm_pmu_perf_overflow(), then it needs to inject this new interrupt, right?
>>> I don't think so. This is a level interrupt, so the level should stay
>>> high as long as the guest hasn't cleared all possible sources for that
>>> interrupt.
>>>
>>> For your example, the guest writes to PMOVSCLR to clear the overflow
>>> caused by a given counter. If the status is now 0, the interrupt line
>>> drops. If the status is still non zero, the line stays high. And I
>>> believe that writing a 1 to PMOVSSET would actually trigger an
>>> interrupt, or keep it high if it has already high.
>>>
>> Right, writing 1 to PMOVSSET will trigger an interrupt.
>>
>>> In essence, do not try to maintain side state. I've been bitten.
>>
>> So on VM entry, it check if PMOVSSET is zero. If not, call 
>> kvm_vgic_inject_irq to set the level high. If so, set the level low.
>> On VM exit, it seems there is nothing to do.
> 
> It is even simpler than that:
> 
> - When you get an overflow, you inject an interrupt with the level set to 1.
> - When the overflow register gets cleared, you inject the same interrupt
> with the level set to 0.
> 
> I don't think you need to do anything else, and the world switch should
> be left untouched.
> 

On 2015/7/17 23:28, Christoffer Dall wrote:>> > +		
kvm_vgic_inject_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->vcpu_id,
>> > +					    pmu->irq_num, 1);
> what context is this overflow handler function?  kvm_vgic_inject_irq
> grabs a mutex, so it can sleep...
>
> from a quick glance at the perf core code, it looks like this is in
> interrupt context, so that call to kvm_vgic_inject_irq looks bad.
>

But as Christoffer said before, it's not good to call
kvm_vgic_inject_irq directly in interrupt context. So if we just kick
the vcpu here and call kvm_vgic_inject_irq on VM entry, is this fine?

Thanks,
-- 
Shannon