On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 10:45:56 +0000, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > The timer was modeled after a strict idea of modelling an interrupt line > level in software, meaning that only transitions in the level needed to > be reported to the VGIC. This works well for the timer, because the > arch timer code is in complete control of the device and can track the > transitions of the line. > > However, as we are about to support using the HW bit in the VGIC not > just for the timer, but also for VFIO which cannot track transitions of > the interrupt line, we have to decide on an interface for level > triggered mapped interrupts to the GIC, which both the timer and VFIO > can use. > > VFIO only sees an asserting transition of the physical interrupt line, > and tells the VGIC when that happens. That means that part of the > interrupt flow is offloaded to the hardware. > > To use the same interface for VFIO devices and the timer, we therefore > have to change the timer (we cannot change VFIO because it doesn't know > the details of the device it is assigning to a VM). > > Luckily, changing the timer is simple, we just need to stop 'caching' > the line level, but instead let the VGIC know the state of the timer > every time there is a potential change in the line level, and when the > line level should be asserted from the timer ISR. The VGIC can ignore > extra notifications using its validate mechanism. > > Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> M. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
