From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, kvm-ppc <kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S: Call into C interrupt handlers
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:37:50 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1335483470.21961.89.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B9B828CD-E9D9-4F9C-ABE0-8F52D758DB71@suse.de>
On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 01:30 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 27.04.2012, at 01:12, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 00:24 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> This is to actually enable interrupts for real, regardless of ppc64
> >> and ppc32. In fact, the previous code was pretty buggy - it was
> >> running the handlers with interrupts disabled ;).
> >
> > They should be run with interrupts disabled.. tho both soft & hard.
>
> The kvm_resched()? No, that one should be run with interrupts enabled - hard and soft :).
Ok, when you said "the handler" I thought you mean do_IRQ & co... those
must be run with IRQs off (and never enabled since taking the actual
exception).
> > You probably do want to call local_irq_disable() unconditionally anyway,
> > because on ppc32, that will give you the proper accounting vs. lockdep.
>
> We already do __hard_irq_disable (which maps to local_irq_disable on ppc32)
> when entering the guest context and when leaving the intercept handler :).
> So that should be fine, no?
Well, __hard_irq_disable() isn't defined on ppc32 in hw_irq.h so if you
redefine it locally that's really gross :-) Also that means that from a
lockdep perspective you are running the entire guest with IRQs off ?
that doesn't sound right...
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-26 23:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-26 10:19 [PATCH 1/2] PPC: Export some interrupt handlers Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 10:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S: Call into C " Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 21:45 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 22:24 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 23:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 23:30 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 23:37 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2012-04-26 23:50 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 0:00 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 21:54 ` Scott Wood
2012-04-26 22:26 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 22:58 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-27 5:48 ` Paul Mackerras
2012-04-27 11:23 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 14:19 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 16:37 ` Scott Wood
2012-04-27 16:54 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 22:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1335483470.21961.89.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox