linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Yipeng Zou <zouyipeng@huawei.com>
Cc: <tglx@linutronix.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <hewenliang4@huawei.com>,
	<chris.zjh@huawei.com>, <liaochang1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: wait irq done to set affinity
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2023 11:55:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <86pmbrop11.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230106082136.68501-1-zouyipeng@huawei.com>

On Fri, 06 Jan 2023 08:21:36 +0000,
Yipeng Zou <zouyipeng@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Recently we have some problem about gic set affinity in our test.
> 
> This patch just aim to make some discuss about this problem.
> 
> For now, the implementation of gic set affinity going to take effects
> immediately, and without check if any irq are being processed.
> 
> So, This leads to some problem, think about this scenario:
> 
> 1. First, we have an irq was generated by an device.
> 
> 2. In the processing of this irq(after handle event, before clear
> IRQD_IRQ_INPROGRESS flag), we modify the route and the gic takes effect
> immediately,at the same time the new one was generated again.

How is that possible?

If it is affected by GICD_IROUTERn (as your patch suggests), then it
is a SPI. If it is a SPI, it has an active state. Which means it
cannot fire again without a deactivation (EOI if EOImode=0, EOI+DIR if
EOImode=1) having taken place.

So either something has deactivated the interrupt without masking it
beforehand, or the active state is not honoured. Either way, this is
wrong.

> 
> 3. The new irq will be processing in other cpu which different form the
> old one.
> 
> 4. The new irq going to be discarded because of the flag IRQD_IRQ_INPROGRESS
> has been set.
> 
> I notice that if we set IRQF_ONESHOT when register the irq, this problem
> will gone.
> 
> But I'm also thinking about change the gic_set_affinity function, to wait
> current irq done on all cpus before gic_write_irouter.
> I'm not sure if that's appropriate.

The base architecture should guarantee that this is not a problem,
thanks to the active state. If that was a LPI (which do not have an
active state), that'd be a different problem. But this doesn't seem to
be the case here.

I'm afraid to say that what you describe seem like a bug of some sort,
either HW or SW.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-06 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-06  8:21 [RFC PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: wait irq done to set affinity Yipeng Zou
2023-01-06 11:55 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2023-01-09 12:26   ` Yipeng Zou
2023-01-17  9:38     ` Thomas Gleixner

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=86pmbrop11.wl-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=chris.zjh@huawei.com \
    --cc=hewenliang4@huawei.com \
    --cc=liaochang1@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=zouyipeng@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).