Hi Marc, On 2019/10/27 22:42, Marc Zyngier wrote:
We currently don't make much use of the DirectLPI feature, and it would be beneficial to do this more, if only because it becomes a mandatory feature for GICv4.1. Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
I have no objection to this patch, which says: Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@xxxxxxxxxx> But this patch really drives me to look through all callsites of dev_event_to_col(), the abstraction which can be used _only_ with physical LPI mappings. I find that when building the INV command, we use dev_event_to_col() to find the "sync_obj" and then pass it to the following SYNC command. But the "INV+SYNC" will be performed both on physical LPI and *VLPI* (lpi_update_config/its_send_inv). So I have two questions about the way we sending INV on VLPI: 1) Which "sync" command should be followed? SYNC or VSYNC? (we currently use SYNC, while the spec says, SYNC "ensures all outstanding ITS operations associated with *physical* interrupts for the Redistributor are globally observed ...") 2) The "sync_obj" we are currently using seems to be wrong. Thanks, Zenghui _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
