[yeah, blast from the past. finally found some bandwidth to pick this up
again...]
On 13/02/17 10:40, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2017, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> @@ -2266,6 +2294,8 @@ int __init its_init(struct fwnode_handle *handle, struct rdists *rdists,
>> struct irq_domain *parent_domain)
>> {
>> struct device_node *of_node;
>> + struct its_node *its;
>> + bool has_v4 = false;
>>
>> its_parent = parent_domain;
>> of_node = to_of_node(handle);
>> @@ -2283,5 +2313,11 @@ int __init its_init(struct fwnode_handle *handle, struct rdists *rdists,
>> its_alloc_lpi_tables();
>> its_lpi_init(rdists->id_bits);
>>
>> + list_for_each_entry(its, &its_nodes, entry)
>> + has_v4 |= its->is_v4;
>
> Hmm, can you have mixed version its nodes? If not, you probably should have
> some sanity check (not necessarily here). If yes, then how does that work?
You definitely can have mixed versions. The trick is to not allow a
GICv4 operation on an interrupt that is not routed through a GICv4 ITS.
That's why the code is sprinkled with its->is_v4 tests in a number of
command handlers...
And yes, people have built this. Shrug...
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
