From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
To: Sascha Bischoff <Sascha.Bischoff@arm.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"kvmarm@lists.linux.dev" <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>,
"maz@kernel.org" <maz@kernel.org>,
"oliver.upton@linux.dev" <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Joey Gouly <Joey.Gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>,
"yuzenghui@huawei.com" <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
"peter.maydell@linaro.org" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
"lpieralisi@kernel.org" <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
Timothy Hayes <Timothy.Hayes@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 21/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Check for pending PPIs
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:13:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260112161329.000063dc@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260109170400.1585048-22-sascha.bischoff@arm.com>
On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 17:04:46 +0000
Sascha Bischoff <Sascha.Bischoff@arm.com> wrote:
> This change allows KVM to check for pending PPI interrupts. This has
> two main components:
>
> First of all, the effective priority mask is calculated. This is a
> combination of the priority mask in the VPEs ICC_PCR_EL1.PRIORITY and
> the currently running priority as determined from the VPE's
> ICH_APR_EL1. If an interrupt's priority is greater than or equal to
> the effective priority mask, it can be signalled. Otherwise, it
> cannot.
>
> Secondly, any Enabled and Pending PPIs must be checked against this
> compound priority mask. The reqires the PPI priorities to by synced
> back to the KVM shadow state - this is skipped in general operation as
> it isn't required and is rather expensive. If any Enabled and Pending
> PPIs are of sufficient priority to be signalled, then there are
> pending PPIs. Else, there are not. This ensures that a VPE is not
> woken when it cannot actually process the pending interrupts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Bischoff <sascha.bischoff@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>
Trivial suggestions below. Assuming you'll tidy up the wrap, the other one
is more of an observation than something I particularly care about.
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v5.c | 133 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c | 3 +
> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 137 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v5.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v5.c
> index c1899add8f5c3..3e2a01e3008c4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v5.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v5.c
> static bool vgic_v5_ppi_set_pending_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct vgic_irq *irq)
> {
> @@ -216,6 +239,112 @@ void vgic_v5_set_ppi_ops(struct vgic_irq *irq)
> irq->ops = &vgic_v5_ppi_irq_ops;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Sync back the PPI priorities to the vgic_irq shadow state for any interrupts
> + * exposed to the guest (skipping all others).
> + */
> +static void vgic_v5_sync_ppi_priorities(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + struct vgic_v5_cpu_if *cpu_if = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v5;
> + u64 priorityr;
> +
> + /*
> + * We have 16 PPI Priority regs, but only have a few interrupts that the
> + * guest is allowed to use. Limit our sync of PPI priorities to those
> + * actually exposed to the guest by first iterating over the mask of
> + * exposed PPIs.
> + */
> + for (int mask_reg = 0; mask_reg < 2; mask_reg++) {
> + unsigned long *p;
> + int i;
> +
> + p = (unsigned long *)&vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic.gicv5_vm.vgic_ppi_mask[mask_reg];
Following is minor, but maybe worth some more thought:
Even though it's silly I'd be tempted to avoid that cast via
unsigned long bm_p = 0;
bitmap_from_arr64(&bm_p,
&vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic.gicv5_vm.vgic_ppi_mask[mask_reg],
//consider a local variable for this!
64);
for_each_set_bit(i, bm_p, 64) {
}
which compiler should be able to collapse to a simple u64 assignment.
> +
> + for_each_set_bit(i, p, 64) {
> + struct vgic_irq *irq;
> + int pri_idx, pri_reg;
> + u32 intid;
> + u8 priority;
> +
> + pri_reg = (mask_reg * 64 + i) / 8;
> + pri_idx = (mask_reg * 64 + i) % 8;
> +
> + priorityr = cpu_if->vgic_ppi_priorityr[pri_reg];
> + priority = (priorityr >> (pri_idx * 8)) & GENMASK(4, 0);
> +
> + intid = FIELD_PREP(GICV5_HWIRQ_TYPE, GICV5_HWIRQ_TYPE_PPI);
> + intid |= FIELD_PREP(GICV5_HWIRQ_ID, mask_reg * 64 + i);
> +
> + irq = vgic_get_vcpu_irq(vcpu, intid);
> +
> + scoped_guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave, &irq->irq_lock)
> + irq->priority = priority;
> +
> + vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq);
> + }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +bool vgic_v5_has_pending_ppi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + struct vgic_v5_cpu_if *cpu_if = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v5;
> + unsigned int priority_mask;
> +
> + /* If no pending bits are set, exit early */
> + if (!cpu_if->vgic_ppi_pendr[0] && !cpu_if->vgic_ppi_pendr[1])
> + return false;
> +
> + priority_mask = vgic_v5_get_effective_priority_mask(vcpu);
> +
> + /* If the combined priority mask is 0, nothing can be signalled! */
> + if (!priority_mask)
> + return false;
> +
> + for (int reg = 0; reg < 2; reg++) {
> + const u64 enabler = cpu_if->vgic_ppi_enabler[reg];
> + const u64 pendr = cpu_if->vgic_ppi_pendr[reg];
> + unsigned long possible_bits;
> + int i;
> +
> + /* Check all interrupts that are enabled and pending */
> + possible_bits = enabler & pendr;
> +
> + /*
> + * Optimisation: pending and enabled with no active priorities
> + */
> + if (possible_bits && priority_mask == 32)
> + return true;
> +
> + for_each_set_bit(i, &possible_bits, 64) {
> + bool has_pending = false;
> + struct vgic_irq *irq;
> + u32 intid;
> +
> + intid = FIELD_PREP(GICV5_HWIRQ_TYPE, GICV5_HWIRQ_TYPE_PPI);
> + intid |= FIELD_PREP(GICV5_HWIRQ_ID, reg * 64 + i);
> +
> + irq = vgic_get_vcpu_irq(vcpu, intid);
> +
> + scoped_guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave, &irq->irq_lock) {
> + /*
> + * We know that the interrupt is
short wrap. This could be
/*
* We know that the interrupt is enabled and
* pending, so only check the priority.
> + */
> + * enabled and pending, so only check
> + * the priority.
> + */
> + if (irq->priority <= priority_mask)
> + has_pending = true;
> + }
> +
> + vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq);
> +
> + if (has_pending)
> + return true;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-12 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-09 17:04 [PATCH v3 00/36] KVM: arm64: Introduce vGIC-v5 with PPI support Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 03/36] arm64/sysreg: Drop ICH_HFGRTR_EL2.ICC_HAPR_EL1 and make RES1 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:03 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 01/36] KVM: arm64: Account for RES1 bits in DECLARE_FEAT_MAP() and co Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 02/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v3: Switch vGIC-v3 to use generated ICH_VMCR_EL2 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:00 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-28 17:26 ` Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 04/36] arm64/sysreg: Add remaining GICv5 ICC_ & ICH_ sysregs for KVM support Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 05/36] arm64/sysreg: Add GICR CDNMIA encoding Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:39 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 06/36] KVM: arm64: gic: Set vgic_model before initing private IRQs Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:37 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 09/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Add Arm copyright header Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:45 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 07/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Add ARM_VGIC_V5 device to KVM headers Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:41 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 08/36] KVM: arm64: gic: Introduce interrupt type helpers Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:44 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 11/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Sanitize ID_AA64PFR2_EL1.GCIE Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:47 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 12/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Support GICv5 FGTs & FGUs Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:55 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 10/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Detect implemented PPIs on boot Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 14:52 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-28 17:28 ` Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 14/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Add vgic-v5 save/restore hyp interface Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 13/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Add emulation for ICC_IAFFIDR_EL1 accesses Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 15/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Implement GICv5 load/put and save/restore Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 15:49 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-28 17:31 ` Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 17/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Finalize GICv5 PPIs and generate mask Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 16/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Implement direct injection of PPIs Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 18/36] KVM: arm64: gic: Introduce queue_irq_unlock and set_pending_state to irq_ops Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 20/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Init Private IRQs (PPIs) for GICv5 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 19/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Implement PPI interrupt injection Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:01 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 21/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Check for pending PPIs Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:13 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2026-01-13 12:16 ` Joey Gouly
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 23/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Support GICv5 interrupts with KVM_IRQ_LINE Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 22/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Trap and mask guest ICC_PPI_ENABLERx_EL1 writes Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 27/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Mandate architected PPI for PMU emulation on GICv5 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-13 12:11 ` Joey Gouly
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 24/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Create, init vgic_v5 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:20 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 26/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Bump arch timer for GICv5 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:27 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 25/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Reset vcpu state Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 28/36] KVM: arm64: gic: Hide GICv5 for protected guests Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 29/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Hide FEAT_GCIE from NV GICv5 guests Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 30/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Introduce kvm_arm_vgic_v5_ops and register them Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 31/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Set ICH_VCTLR_EL2.En on boot Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 34/36] Documentation: KVM: Introduce documentation for VGICv5 Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 32/36] irqchip/gic-v5: Check if impl is virt capable Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 33/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Probe for GICv5 device Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 35/36] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce a minimal GICv5 PPI selftest Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-09 17:04 ` [PATCH v3 36/36] KVM: arm64: gic-v5: Communicate userspace-driveable PPIs via a UAPI Sascha Bischoff
2026-01-12 16:42 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=20260112161329.000063dc@huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=Joey.Gouly@arm.com \
--cc=Sascha.Bischoff@arm.com \
--cc=Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com \
--cc=Timothy.Hayes@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/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