From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: christoffer.dall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 16:19:37 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 3/7] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-v2: Always resample level interrupts In-Reply-To: <1464007023-11736-4-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <1464007023-11736-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <1464007023-11736-4-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160523141937.GA9625@lvm> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 01:36:59PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > When reading back from the list registers, we need to perform > two actions for level interrupts: > 1) clear the soft-pending bit if the interrupt is not pending > anymore *in the list register* > 2) resample the line level and propagate it to the pending state > > But these two actions linked, and we should *always* resample were linked? > the line level, no matter what state is in the list register. > Otherwise, we may end-up injecting spurious interrupts that > have been already retired. > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > --- > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c | 11 +++++++---- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > index 8ad42c2..f659af0 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > @@ -112,10 +112,13 @@ void vgic_v2_fold_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > } > } > > - /* Clear soft pending state when level IRQs have been acked */ > - if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL && > - !(val & GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT)) { > - irq->soft_pending = false; > + /* > + * Clear soft pending state when level irqs have been acked. > + * Always resample the line level. > + */ > + if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL) { > + if (!(val & GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT)) > + irq->soft_pending = false; > irq->pending = irq->line_level; shouldn't this context line then be: irq->pending = irq->line_level || irq->soft_pending; ?? Thanks, -Christoffer