From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/9] xen/arm: vgic: Optimize the way to
 store the target vCPU in the rank
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:56:35 +0100
Message-ID: <1444301795.1410.148.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1444228871-383-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<1444228871-383-8-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1510071821100.1179@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<56156161.4090109@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=716cd9ca0=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1Zk8sJ-0008GH-NO
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 10:56:39 +0000
In-Reply-To: <56156161.4090109@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 19:16 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:

> Furthermore, based on the spec (4.3.12 in IHI 0048B.b): "A register
> field corresponding to an unimplemented interrupt is RAZ/WI."
> 
> If the user knows that an interrupt is not implemented, he may decide to
> write 0 in the corresponding byte. With the current solution, the whole
> write access is ignored.
> 
> The solution suggested in this patch is less restrictive and will just
> ignore the corresponding byte if it's 0.

I think this (a 32-bit register covering both implemented and non
-implemented interrupts) is a compelling reason to only ignore the specific
zero bytes and not the whole word.

> On another side, nothing in the spec specified what happen if the target
> field is 0 for a valid interrupt. But I think this is OK to just ignore
> it and carry on. It's simpler to implement.


On a (not very) related notes, these registers are res0 when affinity
routing is enabled on gic-v3 (which I think is our hardcoded configuration)
and I noticed that vgic_v3_distr_mmio_read doesn't look to implement that
explicitly, hence it uses the default case which logs. Probably we should
add a proper handler which silently does RAZ/WI?