Hi Marc, On 08/11/2017 12:40, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 07/11/17 20:15, Auger Eric wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> On 27/10/2017 16:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> If the guest issues an INT command targetting a VLPI, let's >>> call into the irq_set_irqchip_state() helper to make it pending >>> on the physical side. >>> >>> This works just as well if userspace decides to inject an interrupt >>> using the normal userspace API... >> There is also another path: >> KVM_SIGNAL_MSI ioctl / kvm_send_userspace_msi / kvm_set_msi / >> vgic_its_inject_msi / vgic_its_trigger_msi > > Isn't this path covered by this very patch? I should have read the last sentence of the commit msg to see you haven't ignored it ;-) > >> I wonder whether we shouldn't prevent the userspace from messing up with >> the host irq pending state? > > What do we gain from that limitation? Here, we're just making sure > things will work correctly, and we're not preventing userspace from > doing something silly (the guest will only see spurious interrupts anyway). OK. Just wanted to make sure this was not an issue. Thanks Eric > > Thanks, > > M. > >> Thanks >> >> Eric >>> >>> Acked-by: Christoffer Dall <cdall@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 4 ++++ >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c >>> index 89768d2b6a91..b2a678d131d0 100644 >>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c >>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c >>> @@ -578,6 +578,10 @@ static int vgic_its_trigger_msi(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its, >>> if (err) >>> return err; >>> >>> + if (irq->hw) >>> + return irq_set_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq, >>> + IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, true); >>> + >>> spin_lock(&irq->irq_lock); >>> irq->pending_latch = true; >>> vgic_queue_irq_unlock(kvm, irq); >>> > > _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
