From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Matthew Ogilvie <mmogilvi_qemu@miniinfo.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] KVM: fix i8259 interrupt high to low transition logic
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:51:58 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50504D2E.2080802@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50504C69.60703@siemens.com>
On 09/12/2012 11:48 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-09-12 10:01, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 09/10/2012 04:29 AM, Matthew Ogilvie wrote:
>>> Intel's definition of "edge triggered" means: "asserted with a
>>> low-to-high transition at the time an interrupt is registered
>>> and then kept high until the interrupt is served via one of the
>>> EOI mechanisms or goes away unhandled."
>>>
>>> So the only difference between edge triggered and level triggered
>>> is in the leading edge, with no difference in the trailing edge.
>>>
>>> This bug manifested itself when the guest was Microport UNIX
>>> System V/386 v2.1 (ca. 1987), because it would sometimes mask
>>> off IRQ14 in the slave IMR after it had already been asserted.
>>> The master would still try to deliver an interrupt even though
>>> IRQ2 had dropped again, resulting in a spurious interupt
>>> (IRQ15) and a panicked UNIX kernel.
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
>>> index adba28f..5cbba99 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
>>> @@ -302,8 +302,12 @@ static void pit_do_work(struct kthread_work *work)
>>> }
>>> spin_unlock(&ps->inject_lock);
>>> if (inject) {
>>> - kvm_set_irq(kvm, kvm->arch.vpit->irq_source_id, 0, 1);
>>> + /* Clear previous interrupt, then create a rising
>>> + * edge to request another interupt, and leave it at
>>> + * level=1 until time to inject another one.
>>> + */
>>> kvm_set_irq(kvm, kvm->arch.vpit->irq_source_id, 0, 0);
>>> + kvm_set_irq(kvm, kvm->arch.vpit->irq_source_id, 0, 1);
>>>
>>> /*
>>
>> I thought I understood this, now I'm not sure. How can this be correct?
>> Real hardware doesn't act like this.
>>
>> What if the PIT is disabled after this? You're injecting a spurious
>> interrupt then.
>
> Yes, the PIT has to raise the output as long as specified, i.e.
> according to the datasheet. That's important now due to the corrections
> to the PIC. We can then carefully check if there is room for
> simplifications / optimizations. I also cannot imagine that the above
> already fulfills these requirements.
>
> And if the PIT is disabled by the HPET, we need to clear the output
> explicitly as we inject the IRQ#0 under a different source ID than
> userspace HPET does (which will logically take over IRQ#0 control). The
> kernel would otherwise OR both sources to an incorrect result.
>
I guess we need to double the hrtimer rate then in order to generate a
square wave. It's getting ridiculous how accurate our model needs to be.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-12 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-10 1:29 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] KVM: fix i8259 interrupt high to low transition logic Matthew Ogilvie
2012-09-10 1:29 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] KVM: i8259: refactor pic_set_irq level logic Matthew Ogilvie
2012-09-11 0:49 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] KVM: fix i8259 interrupt high to low transition logic Maciej W. Rozycki
2012-09-11 4:54 ` Matthew Ogilvie
2012-09-11 11:53 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2012-09-11 9:04 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-09-12 8:01 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-12 8:48 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-09-12 8:51 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2012-09-12 8:57 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-09-12 9:02 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-13 5:49 ` Matthew Ogilvie
2012-09-13 13:41 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2012-09-13 13:49 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-09-13 13:55 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-09-13 15:48 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
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=50504D2E.2080802@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=mmogilvi_qemu@miniinfo.net \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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).