From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] xen/arm: vgic: Optimize the way to
 store the target vCPU in the rank
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:34:28 +0100
Message-ID: <1445592868.2374.84.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1444659760-24123-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<1444659760-24123-4-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<1445530664.2374.45.camel@citrix.com> <562919CF.1020709@citrix.com>
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.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=7311588c8=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1ZpYk3-0001G4-V4
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:34:32 +0000
In-Reply-To: <562919CF.1020709@citrix.com>
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@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Cc: stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 18:15 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> 
> On 22/10/15 17:17, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-10-12 at 15:22 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >          /* Only migrate the vIRQ if the target vCPU has changed */
> > >          if ( new_target != old_target )
> > >          {
> > > +            unsigned int virq = rank->index * NR_INTERRUPT_PER_RANK
> > > + offset;
> > 
> > FWIW this was the value of offset before it was shifted + masked, I
> > think.
> > Could you not just save it up top and remember it?
> 
> In fact, the virq is already correctly set before the loop (see patch
> #2):
> 
> virq = rank->index * NR_INTERRUPT_PER_RANK + offset;
> 
> The variable is incremented in the for loop. So I just forgot to drop
> this line when I did the split.
> 
> Not that it's not possible to use directly offset because for byte
> access it will point to the byte modified and not the base address of
> the register.
> 
> Though, I could use a mask, but I find this solution clearer.

But per the above what is actually going to happen is you drop this change?

Ian.