On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 11:13:05AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 05:56:00PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 04:31:06PM +0000, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote: > > > From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 7:45 PM > > > > > > > > On ARM64 Hyper-V guests, SPIs are used for the interrupts of virtual PCI > > > > devices, and SPIs can be managed directly via GICD registers. Therefore > > > > the retarget interrupt hypercall is not needed on ARM64. > > > > > > > > An arch-specific interface hv_arch_irq_unmask() is introduced to handle > > > > the architecture level differences on this. For x86, the behavior > > > > remains unchanged, while for ARM64 no hypercall is invoked when > > > > unmasking an irq for virtual PCI devices. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > v1 -> v2: > > > > > > > > * Introduce arch-specific interface hv_arch_irq_unmask() as > > > > suggested by Bjorn > > > > > > > > drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c | 233 +++++++++++++++------------- > > > > 1 file changed, 122 insertions(+), 111 deletions(-) > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Michael Kelley <mikelley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I expect this to go through the PCI tree. Let me know if I should pick > > this up. > > > > I also expect the same. > > Lorenzo, let me know if there is more work needed for this patch. > Thanks! It is tagged as an RFC that's why I have not considered it for v5.18, I will have a look shortly. Thanks, Lorenzo
