[PATCH 5/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Remove the IRQ field from struct irq_phys_map
Andre Przywara
andre.przywara at arm.com
Mon Apr 25 03:49:14 PDT 2016
Hej Christoffer,
On 21/04/16 19:32, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 07:41:01PM +0200, Eric Auger wrote:
>> Hi Andre,
>> On 04/15/2016 04:04 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>> From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall at linaro.org>
>>>
>>> The communication of a Linux IRQ number from outside the VGIC to the
>>> vgic was a leftover from the day when the vgic code cared about how a
>>> particular device injects virtual interrupts mapped to a physical
>>> interrupt.
>>>
>>> We can safely remove this notion, leaving all physical IRQ handling to
>>> be done in the device driver (the arch timer in this case), which makes
>>> room for a saner API for the new VGIC.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall at linaro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara at arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/kvm/arm_vgic.h | 3 +--
>>> virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 20 ++------------------
>>> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
>>> index 43eeb18..49c559e 100644
>>> --- a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
>>> +++ b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
>>> @@ -157,7 +157,6 @@ struct vgic_io_device {
>>> struct irq_phys_map {
>>> u32 virt_irq;
>>> u32 phys_irq;
>>> - u32 irq;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct irq_phys_map_entry {
>>> @@ -345,7 +344,7 @@ int kvm_vgic_inject_mapped_irq(struct kvm *kvm, int cpuid,
>>> void vgic_v3_dispatch_sgi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 reg);
>>> int kvm_vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>>> struct irq_phys_map *kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> - int virt_irq, int irq);
>>> + int virt_irq, int phys_irq);
>>> int kvm_vgic_unmap_phys_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int virt_irq);
>>> bool kvm_vgic_map_is_active(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int virt_irq);
>>>
>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>> index b4d96b1..cfdf88f 100644
>>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
>>> @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ void kvm_timer_flush_hwstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> if (timer->active_cleared_last && !phys_active)
>>> return;
>>>
>>> - ret = irq_set_irqchip_state(timer->map->irq,
>>> + ret = irq_set_irqchip_state(host_vtimer_irq,
>>> IRQCHIP_STATE_ACTIVE,
>>> phys_active);
>>> WARN_ON(ret);
>>> @@ -307,6 +307,9 @@ int kvm_timer_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> {
>>> struct arch_timer_cpu *timer = &vcpu->arch.timer_cpu;
>>> struct irq_phys_map *map;
>>> + struct irq_desc *desc;
>>> + struct irq_data *data;
>>> + int phys_irq;
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * The vcpu timer irq number cannot be determined in
>>> @@ -326,10 +329,25 @@ int kvm_timer_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> kvm_timer_update_state(vcpu);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> + * Find the physical IRQ number corresponding to the host_vtimer_irq
>>> + */
>>> + desc = irq_to_desc(host_vtimer_irq);
>>> + if (!desc) {
>> can this really happen?
>
> this is just moving the logic. We had this check before, so I assume
> so...
>
>>> + kvm_err("%s: no interrupt descriptor\n", __func__);
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + data = irq_desc_get_irq_data(desc);
>>> + while (data->parent_data)
>>> + data = data->parent_data;
>>> +
>>> + phys_irq = data->hwirq;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> * Tell the VGIC that the virtual interrupt is tied to a
>>> * physical interrupt. We do that once per VCPU.
>>> */
>>> - map = kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq(vcpu, irq->irq, host_vtimer_irq);
>>> + map = kvm_vgic_map_phys_irq(vcpu, irq->irq, phys_irq);
>>> if (WARN_ON(IS_ERR(map)))
>>> return PTR_ERR(map);
>>>
>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>>> index 2d7ae35..ac5838b 100644
>>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>>> @@ -1723,27 +1723,13 @@ static struct list_head *vgic_get_irq_phys_map_list(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> * Returns a valid pointer on success, and an error pointer otherwise
>>> */
>> the doc comment must be updated
>> * @irq: The Linux IRQ number
>>
>> Besides
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger at linaro.org>
>>
> Thanks!
>
> Andre, let me know if you need me to provide an updated patch or if you
> can just tweak that comment.
I am fine with fixing this up there, I need to rebase and repost it
anyway as part of the integration into the new VGIC series.
Cheers,
Andre.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list