On 07/11/17 21:28, Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Marc, > > On 27/10/2017 16:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> Upon updating a property, we propagate it all the way to the physical >> ITS, and ask for an INV command to be executed there. >> >> Acked-by: Christoffer Dall <cdall@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> >> --- >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c >> index 0b7e648e7a0c..2e77c7c83942 100644 >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c >> @@ -296,6 +296,9 @@ static int update_lpi_config(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq, >> spin_unlock(&irq->irq_lock); >> } >> >> + if (irq->hw) >> + return its_prop_update_vlpi(irq->host_irq, prop, true); >> + >> return 0; >> } > I am confused by the vgic_queue_irq_unlock() on the "hw" path. Why is it > needed in hw mode? It's not. I guess we could bypass this altogether and take a short cut after having updated the priority and enabled fields. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
