On 17/03/16 12:45, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> Moving an unmasked irq may result in irq handler being invoked on both
> source and target CPUs.
>
> With 2-level this can happen as follows:
>
> On source CPU:
> evtchn_2l_handle_events() ->
> generic_handle_irq() ->
> handle_edge_irq() ->
> eoi_pirq():
> irq_move_irq(data);
>
> /***** WE ARE HERE *****/
>
> if (VALID_EVTCHN(evtchn))
> clear_evtchn(evtchn);
>
> If at this moment target processor is handling an unrelated event in
> evtchn_2l_handle_events()'s loop it may pick up our event since target's
> cpu_evtchn_mask claims that this event belongs to it *and* the event is
> unmasked and still pending. At the same time, source CPU will continue
> executing its own handle_edge_irq().
>
> With FIFO interrupt the scenario is similar: irq_move_irq() may result
> in a EVTCHNOP_unmask hypercall which, in turn, may make the event
> pending on the target CPU.
>
> We can avoid this situation by moving and clearing the event while
> keeping event masked.
Can you do:
if (unlikely(irqd_is_setaffinity_pending(data))) {
masked = test_and_set_mask()
clear_evtchn()
irq_move_masked_irq()
unmask(masked);
} else
clear_evtchn()
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html