Re: [PATCH v5 05/15] KVM: s390: unify pending_irqs() and pending_irqs_no_gisa()

Cornelia Huck
2018-12-20T12:21:30Z

On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 12:49:56 +0100
Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 20.12.18 12:06, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 20:17:46 +0100
> > Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Use a single function with parameter irq_flags to differentiate
> >> between cases.
> >>
> >> New irq flag:
> >> IRQ_FLAG_LOCAL: include vcpu local interruptions pending
> >> IRQ_FLAG_FLOATING: include vcpu floating interruptions pending
> >> IRQ_FLAG_GISA: include GISA interruptions pending in IPM
> >
> > I presume that means that irqs may be in more than one set? Or are gisa
> > irqs not considered floating irqs, because they use a different
> > mechanism?
>
> Currently, the interruptions managed in GISA are floating only. But
> that might change in future. The idea is not to subsume IRQ_FLAG_GISA
> in IRQ_FLAG_FLOATING but to be able to address the right set of
> procedures to determine the irq pending set for a given subset of irq
> types that have different implementations.
>
> There might be a better name for IRQ_FLAG_FLOATING then?

So the split is:

- local interrupts that are pending via kvm structures;
- floating interrupts that are pending via kvm structures;
- interrupts that are pending via gisa?

If so, what about
- IRQ_FLAG_KVM_LOCAL
- IRQ_FLAG_KVM_FLOATING
- IRQ_FLAG_GISA (or maybe IRQ_FLAG_GISA_FLOATING, if you need to
distinguish those later on?)

>
> >
> >>
> >> New irq masks:
> >> IRQ_MASK_ALL: include all types
> >> IRQ_MASK_NO_GISA: include all types but GISA
> >>
> >> Examples:
> >> pending_irqs(vcpu, IRQ_MASK_ALL)
> >> pending_irqs(vcpu, IRQ_MASK_NO_GISA)
> >>
> >> There will be more irq flags with upcoming patches.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++------------
> >> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c b/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
> >> index 093b568b6356..4ab20d2eb180 100644
> >> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
> >> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
> >> @@ -31,6 +31,13 @@
> >> #define PFAULT_DONE 0x0680
> >> #define VIRTIO_PARAM 0x0d00
> >>
> >> +#define IRQ_FLAG_LOCAL 0x8000 /* include local interruption pending mask */
> >> +#define IRQ_FLAG_FLOATING 0x4000 /* include float interruption pending mask */
> >> +#define IRQ_FLAG_GISA 0x2000 /* include GISA interruption pending mask */
> >> +
> >> +#define IRQ_MASK_ALL (IRQ_FLAG_LOCAL | IRQ_FLAG_FLOATING | IRQ_FLAG_GISA)
> >> +#define IRQ_MASK_NO_GISA (IRQ_MASK_ALL & ~IRQ_FLAG_GISA)
> >> +
> >> /* handle external calls via sigp interpretation facility */
> >> static int sca_ext_call_pending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int *src_id)
> >> {
> >> @@ -237,16 +244,18 @@ static inline int kvm_s390_gisa_tac_ipm_gisc(struct kvm_s390_gisa *gisa, u32 gis
> >> return test_and_clear_bit_inv(IPM_BIT_OFFSET + gisc, (unsigned long *) gisa);
> >> }
> >>
> >> -static inline unsigned long pending_irqs_no_gisa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> +static inline unsigned long pending_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u16 irq_flags)
> >
> > Any deeper reason why this is a u16? 16 bits should be enough for
> > everyone? :)
>
> I want to use the 8 bits for the IRQ type and the other 8 for additional
> controls, see: "KVM: s390: restore IAM in get_ipm() when IPM is clean"

Still need to look at that patch, but my question mainly was "why only
16 bits"? I would think making this local variable larger is cheap.

>
> >
> >> {
> >> - return vcpu->kvm->arch.float_int.pending_irqs |
> >> - vcpu->arch.local_int.pending_irqs;
> >> -}