On 2021/3/11 17:14, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 12:13:36 +0000,
> Shenming Lu <lushenming@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> When setting the forwarding path of a VLPI (switch to the HW mode),
>> we could also transfer the pending state from irq->pending_latch to
>> VPT (especially in migration, the pending states of VLPIs are restored
>> into kvm’s vgic first). And we currently send "INT+VSYNC" to trigger
>> a VLPI to pending.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Shenming Lu <lushenming@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v4.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v4.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v4.c
>> index ac029ba3d337..a3542af6f04a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v4.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v4.c
>> @@ -449,6 +449,20 @@ int kvm_vgic_v4_set_forwarding(struct kvm *kvm, int virq,
>> irq->host_irq = virq;
>> atomic_inc(&map.vpe->vlpi_count);
>>
>> + /* Transfer pending state */
>> + if (irq->pending_latch) {
>> + ret = irq_set_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq,
>> + IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING,
>> + irq->pending_latch);
>> + WARN_RATELIMIT(ret, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Let it be pruned from ap_list later and don't bother
>> + * the List Register.
>> + */
>> + irq->pending_latch = false;
>
> NAK. If the interrupt is on the AP list, it must be pruned from it
> *immediately*. The only case where it can be !pending and still on the
> AP list is in interval between sync and prune. If we start messing
> with this, we can't reason about the state of this list anymore.
>
> Consider calling vgic_queue_irq_unlock() here.
Thanks for giving a hint, but it seems that vgic_queue_irq_unlock() only
queues an IRQ after checking, did you mean vgic_prune_ap_list() instead?
Thanks a lot for the comments! :-)
Shenming
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
