From: cdall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 3/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Don't cache the timer IRQ level
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:05:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171019130548.GR8900@cbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k203uw01.fsf@on-the-bus.cambridge.arm.com>
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:39:58AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15 2017 at 3:19:50 pm BST, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> > From: Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org>
> >
> > The timer was modeled after a strict idea of modelling an interrupt line
> > level in software, meaning that only transitions in the level needed to
> > be reported to the VGIC. This works well for the timer, because the
> > arch timer code is in complete control of the device and can track the
> > transitions of the line.
> >
> > However, as we are about to support using the HW bit in the VGIC not
> > just for the timer, but also for VFIO which cannot track transitions of
> > the interrupt line, we have to decide on an interface for level
> > triggered mapped interrupts to the GIC, which both the timer and VFIO
> > can use.
> >
> > VFIO only sees an asserting transition of the physical interrupt line,
> > and tells the VGIC when that happens. That means that part of the
> > interrupt flow is offloaded to the hardware.
> >
> > To use the same interface for VFIO devices and the timer, we therefore
> > have to change the timer (we cannot change VFIO because it doesn't know
> > the details of the device it is assigning to a VM).
> >
> > Luckily, changing the timer is simple, we just need to stop 'caching'
> > the line level, but instead let the VGIC know the state of the timer on
> > every entry to the guest, and the VGIC can ignore notifications using
> > its validate mechanism.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 14 ++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> > index 8e89d63..2a5f877 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> > @@ -219,9 +219,10 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level,
> > int ret;
> >
> > timer_ctx->active_cleared_last = false;
> > + if (timer_ctx->irq.level != new_level)
> > + trace_kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu->vcpu_id, timer_ctx->irq.irq,
> > + new_level);
> > timer_ctx->irq.level = new_level;
> > - trace_kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu->vcpu_id, timer_ctx->irq.irq,
> > - timer_ctx->irq.level);
> >
> > if (likely(irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))) {
> > ret = kvm_vgic_inject_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->vcpu_id,
> > @@ -241,6 +242,7 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > struct arch_timer_cpu *timer = &vcpu->arch.timer_cpu;
> > struct arch_timer_context *vtimer = vcpu_vtimer(vcpu);
> > struct arch_timer_context *ptimer = vcpu_ptimer(vcpu);
> > + bool level;
> >
> > /*
> > * If userspace modified the timer registers via SET_ONE_REG before
> > @@ -251,11 +253,11 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > if (unlikely(!timer->enabled))
> > return;
> >
> > - if (kvm_timer_should_fire(vtimer) != vtimer->irq.level)
> > - kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu, !vtimer->irq.level, vtimer);
> > + level = kvm_timer_should_fire(vtimer);
> > + kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu, level, vtimer);
> >
> > - if (kvm_timer_should_fire(ptimer) != ptimer->irq.level)
> > - kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu, !ptimer->irq.level, ptimer);
> > + level = kvm_timer_should_fire(ptimer);
> > + kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu, level, ptimer);
>
> Well, at this stage, you might as well fold the kvm_timer_should_fire()
> into kvm_timer_update_irq() and from the level parameter. But I suspect
> this is going to clash badly with your timer series?
>
Yes, it's doing extra unnecessary work in the critical path on IRQ
injections from the ISR after the timer series.
How about I rebase this series on the timer series and do a resend of
this one, without additional changes, and we have a look at it?
> > }
> >
> > /* Schedule the background timer for the emulated timer. */
>
> Otherwise:
>
> Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>
Thanks!
-Christoffer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-19 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-15 22:19 [PATCH v4 0/7] Handle forwarded level-triggered interrupts Christoffer Dall
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Remove redundant preemptible checks Christoffer Dall
2017-10-10 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Factor out functionality to get vgic mmio requester_vcpu Christoffer Dall
2017-10-10 10:27 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Don't cache the timer IRQ level Christoffer Dall
2017-10-10 10:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-10-19 13:05 ` Christoffer Dall [this message]
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic: restructure kvm_vgic_(un)map_phys_irq Christoffer Dall
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic: Support level-triggered mapped interrupts Christoffer Dall
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Provide a vgic interrupt line level sample function Christoffer Dall
2017-09-15 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] KVM: arm/arm64: Support VGIC dist pend/active changes for mapped IRQs Christoffer Dall
2017-10-10 10:49 ` Marc Zyngier
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=20171019130548.GR8900@cbox \
--to=cdall@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).