> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 9:42 PM
>
> On Wed, Nov 23 2022 at 08:16, Kevin Tian wrote:
> >> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2022 10:38 PM
> >> +
> >> + /*
> >> + * Mask out the domain specific MSI feature flags which are not
> >> + * supported by the real parent.
> >> + */
> >> + info->flags &= pops->supported_flags;
> >> + /* Enforce the required flags */
> >> + info->flags |=
> >> X86_VECTOR_MSI_FLAGS_REQUIRED;
> >> +
> >> + /* This is always invoked from the top level MSI domain! */
> >> + info->ops->msi_prepare = x86_msi_prepare;
> >> +
> >> + info->chip->irq_ack = irq_chip_ack_parent;
> >> + info->chip->irq_retrigger = irq_chip_retrigger_hierarchy;
> >> + info->chip->flags |= IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE |
> >> + IRQCHIP_AFFINITY_PRE_STARTUP;
> >
> > Above are executed twice for both IR and vector after next patch comes.
> > Could skip it for IR.
>
> How so?
>
> +static const struct msi_parent_ops dmar_msi_parent_ops = {
> + .supported_flags = X86_VECTOR_MSI_FLAGS_SUPPORTED |
> MSI_FLAG_MULTI_PCI_MSI,
> + .prefix = "IR-",
> + .init_dev_msi_info = msi_parent_init_dev_msi_info,
> +};
>
> IR delegates the init to its parent domain, i.e. the vector domain. So
> there is no double invocation.
>
oops. How come I read msi_parent_init_dev_msi_info() as
x86_init_dev_msi_info(). 😊
