From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/33] xen/arm: Let the toolstack
 configure the number of SPIs
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 12:59:50 +0100
Message-ID: <1427803190.2115.112.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1426793399-6283-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<1426793399-6283-17-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<1427799247.2115.61.camel@citrix.com> <551A8888.8050902@linaro.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>) id 1Ycupo-0006pH-4N
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 11:59:56 +0000
In-Reply-To: <551A8888.8050902@linaro.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, tim@xen.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 12:44 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> 
> On 31/03/15 11:54, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 19:29 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> >> @@ -68,16 +68,17 @@ static void vgic_init_pending_irq(struct pending_irq *p, unsigned int virq)
> >>      p->irq = virq;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> -int domain_vgic_init(struct domain *d)
> >> +int domain_vgic_init(struct domain *d, unsigned int nr_spis)
> >>  {
> >>      int i;
> >>  
> >>      d->arch.vgic.ctlr = 0;
> >>  
> > [...]
> >> +    /* Limit the number of SPIs supported base on the hardware */
> >> +    if ( nr_spis > (gic_number_lines() - NR_LOCAL_IRQS) )
> >> +        return -EINVAL;
> > 
> > Is there anything in the h/w which leads to this restriction?
> 
> The h/w accept an VirtualID < 1020. Although, given that we can only
> route a physical interrupt to the guest, it's pointless to support more
> SPIs than the h/w does.

Right, but it's an artificial restriction at this level. Lets not
bother.

> > If not then I think we should just check against the architectural 1020
> > limit and leave it at that.
> 
> I would have to check on 988 (1020 - 32) which I find less readable.

I'd test nr_spis+32 < 1020, which I think is clear enough.

Ian.