From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:56:45 -0600 Message-ID: <1439405805.4023.529.camel@redhat.com> References: <1439212864-12954-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <1439212864-12954-6-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254765AD55 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:43:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CVGYt8eJXZGz for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:43:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67C435AD54 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:43:40 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <1439212864-12954-6-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: Eric Auger Cc: eric.auger@st.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, patches@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, feng.wu@intel.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Mon, 2015-08-10 at 15:20 +0200, Eric Auger wrote: > This function returns whether the IRQ is active at irqchip level or > VFIO masked. If either is true, it is considered the IRQ is active. > Currently there is no way to differentiate userspace masked IRQ from > automasked IRQ. There might be false detection of activity. However > it is currently acceptable to have false detection. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger > > --- > --- > drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > index a285384..efaee58 100644 > --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > @@ -205,6 +205,23 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq, > return 0; > } > > +static int vfio_platform_is_active(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq) vfio_platform_irq_is_active()? > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + bool active, masked, outstanding; > + int ret; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->lock, flags); > + > + ret = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->hwirq, IRQCHIP_STATE_ACTIVE, &active); > + BUG_ON(ret); Why can't we propagate this error to the caller and let them decide? > + masked = irq->masked; > + outstanding = active || masked; > + > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags); > + return outstanding; > +} > + > static void vfio_platform_irq_bypass_stop(struct irq_bypass_producer *prod) > { > } From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alex.williamson@redhat.com (Alex Williamson) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:56:45 -0600 Subject: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active In-Reply-To: <1439212864-12954-6-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> References: <1439212864-12954-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <1439212864-12954-6-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> Message-ID: <1439405805.4023.529.camel@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2015-08-10 at 15:20 +0200, Eric Auger wrote: > This function returns whether the IRQ is active at irqchip level or > VFIO masked. If either is true, it is considered the IRQ is active. > Currently there is no way to differentiate userspace masked IRQ from > automasked IRQ. There might be false detection of activity. However > it is currently acceptable to have false detection. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger > > --- > --- > drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > index a285384..efaee58 100644 > --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > @@ -205,6 +205,23 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq, > return 0; > } > > +static int vfio_platform_is_active(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq) vfio_platform_irq_is_active()? > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + bool active, masked, outstanding; > + int ret; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->lock, flags); > + > + ret = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->hwirq, IRQCHIP_STATE_ACTIVE, &active); > + BUG_ON(ret); Why can't we propagate this error to the caller and let them decide? > + masked = irq->masked; > + outstanding = active || masked; > + > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags); > + return outstanding; > +} > + > static void vfio_platform_irq_bypass_stop(struct irq_bypass_producer *prod) > { > } From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752023AbbHLS4s (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:56:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42610 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751867AbbHLS4r (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:56:47 -0400 Message-ID: <1439405805.4023.529.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active From: Alex Williamson To: Eric Auger Cc: eric.auger@st.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, feng.wu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@linaro.org, pbonzini@redhat.com Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:56:45 -0600 In-Reply-To: <1439212864-12954-6-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> References: <1439212864-12954-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <1439212864-12954-6-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2015-08-10 at 15:20 +0200, Eric Auger wrote: > This function returns whether the IRQ is active at irqchip level or > VFIO masked. If either is true, it is considered the IRQ is active. > Currently there is no way to differentiate userspace masked IRQ from > automasked IRQ. There might be false detection of activity. However > it is currently acceptable to have false detection. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger > > --- > --- > drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > index a285384..efaee58 100644 > --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c > @@ -205,6 +205,23 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq, > return 0; > } > > +static int vfio_platform_is_active(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq) vfio_platform_irq_is_active()? > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + bool active, masked, outstanding; > + int ret; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->lock, flags); > + > + ret = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->hwirq, IRQCHIP_STATE_ACTIVE, &active); > + BUG_ON(ret); Why can't we propagate this error to the caller and let them decide? > + masked = irq->masked; > + outstanding = active || masked; > + > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags); > + return outstanding; > +} > + > static void vfio_platform_irq_bypass_stop(struct irq_bypass_producer *prod) > { > }