On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 04:36:06PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 28/08/17 19:18, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 06:26:29PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> When a vPE is not running, a VLPI being made pending results in a
> >> doorbell interrupt being delivered. Let's handle this interrupt
> >> and update the pending_last flag that indicates that VLPIs are
> >> pending. The corresponding vcpu is also kicked into action.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c
> >> index 534d3051a078..6af3cde6d7d4 100644
> >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c
> >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v4.c
> >> @@ -21,6 +21,19 @@
> >>
> >> #include "vgic.h"
> >>
> >> +static irqreturn_t vgic_v4_doorbell_handler(int irq, void *info)
> >> +{
> >> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = info;
> >> +
> >> + if (!kvm_vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(vcpu)) {
> >> + vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v3.its_vpe.pending_last = true;
> >> + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_IRQ_PENDING, vcpu);
> >> + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu);
> >> + }
> >
> > Can this ever fire while vgic_v4_init() is running and before te rest of
> > the system has been properly initialized with some entertaining results
> > to follow? (I'm not sure if spurious doorbell non-resident vPE
> > interrupts is a thing or not).
>
> It could if you only had this patch. The following patch makes sure that
> the interrupt does not get enabled at request time, meaning it will only
> get enabled when the vcpu will eventually block.
>
> And yes, spurious doorbells are a real thing. And they suck.
>
Ah, my abilities to forward read on a patch series are quite poor.
Thanks,
-Christoffer
