On 2019-09-28 04:11, Zenghui Yu wrote:
On 2019/9/24 2:26, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Now that we have HW-accelerated SGIs being delivered to VPEs, it
becomes required to map the VPEs on all ITSs instead of relying
on the lazy approach that we would use when using the ITS-list
mechanism.
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c | 39
+++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
index 4aae9582182b..a1e8c4c2598a 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
@@ -1417,12 +1417,31 @@ static int its_irq_set_irqchip_state(struct
irq_data *d,
return 0;
}
+/*
+ * Two favourable cases:
+ *
+ * (a) Either we have a GICv4.1, and all vPEs have to be mapped at
all times
+ * for vSGI delivery
+ *
+ * (b) Or the ITSs do not use a list map, meaning that VMOVP is
cheap enough
+ * and we're better off mapping all VPEs always
+ *
+ * If neither (a) nor (b) is true, then we map VLPIs on demand.
^^^^^
vPEs
Yes, well caught.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
