From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E10BC35274 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 17:20:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=BydJu/99mooVyGKR27TYBCimVctfW1+MVlTJ/L3VEJc=; b=UVwsEBrAO1ypQT nJYX5APM5lhAhLy5I4xZxtI+YRv5zOx2rm+38KeuFMR0oYeXMy3zDzphY9UDZE6ZD9nbu5j8Rt99c nxtwGVFtn5To8L/C0H4zZ74MW9oUWtumDBd85p5fPkcvqhlcr5J7Q1oW+jmUes7J8x686Su51CrHy /1+OYUrTNrgmACCUcSaOCbsiALijwYkISd9nebrhFPOD3+EXDQ9k2RtLKmusA18Nq8pM867XXQD7j xopML4kAMQC6nHWV1TWXWhFCvvGszisjdIBTbLjQW97Z4NJmhUWKF8k5xWKreMnpn3bf7KSY1fU8Q N99XJ1+LyTyMyuNevI1w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rFHHu-00Bc9b-1O; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 17:20:18 +0000 Received: from out-187.mta0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:1004:224b::bb]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rFHHr-00Bc8Q-02 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 17:20:17 +0000 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 17:20:04 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1702920009; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gZ5piTv0+pYp16eP2qMvs+lTjxUIdakKgcBRhgaO2U4=; b=sacaxvELU65hlgNAtaUo0nZziNlrsTWqPWJQ6Nwc19vywZeLqjxoHYCmwWoYR3SHYtb+SG y6I3nMK/Q3uTtMEWthVNMVFbcb8xrTNjA9C3js0S5fzyxahj2GD6o7T7dJ4JFRD0xr0I3H q8CsUIXdXuxr9BdAM8LifTywD3fyK94= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: Marc Zyngier Cc: Kunkun Jiang , James Morse , Suzuki K Poulose , Zenghui Yu , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Jean-Philippe Brucker , "moderated list:ARM SMMU DRIVERS" , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, open list , "wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com" Subject: Re: [bug report] GICv4.1: vSGI remains pending across the guest reset Message-ID: References: <7e7f2c0c-448b-10a9-8929-4b8f4f6e2a32@huawei.com> <87a5q983zc.wl-maz@kernel.org> <878r5s8xvc.wl-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878r5s8xvc.wl-maz@kernel.org> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20231218_092015_463303_4B6D4A7E X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.69 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 06:52:55PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 17:34:38 +0000, > Oliver Upton wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 05:33:16PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 11:26:15AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > But this has *nothing* to do with the guest. This is the *host* > > > > userspace performing a write to the redistributor view, which has > > > > different semantics. Which is why your earlier description made no > > > > sense to me. > > > > > > > > I think the problem is slightly larger than what you describe. A write > > > > to ISPENDR0 should be propagated to the ITS for any values of the > > > > latch, just like this happens on enabling HW-backed SGIs. > > > > > > > > Can you please give this a go? > > > > > > What do you think about using this as an opportunity for a bit of > > > cleanup? It'd be nice unify the various MMIO and uaccess handlers for > > > SPENDING + CPENDING while being careful about the arch_timer interrupt. > > What is special about the timer interrupt? Isn't that the case where we have a physical IRQ mapped and wind up forwarding state to the physical GIC? > Could be. But I'd rather have separate fixes from more invasive > reworks. Specially given that we have had multiple ugly bugs around > this code in the past, which is why we ended up splitting userspace > from guest accessors. Fine by me. I had felt like a common helper w/ the user v. guest exclusions is a bit easier to understand than diffing two very similar functions, but it isn't a big deal. Anyway, I'm happy with your fix. I'd like Kunkun to give it a go but either way I can pick it up for 6.7. -- Thanks, Oliver _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel