From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
To: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: use of struct hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping.gmsi vs. HVM_IRQ_DPCI_*_MSI flags
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 15:15:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D94A88C0200007800039637@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
pt_irq_create_bind_vtd() initializes this substructure only when setting
.flags to HVM_IRQ_DPCI_MACH_MSI|HVM_IRQ_DPCI_GUEST_MSI (the
PT_IRQ_TYPE_MSI case), while the other path will not set
HVM_IRQ_DPCI_GUEST_MSI but may also set HVM_IRQ_DPCI_MACH_MSI.
Yet hvm_dpci_msi_eoi() and hvm_migrate_pirqs() check for
HVM_IRQ_DPCI_MACH_MSI, i.e. may run into an uninitialized
.gmsi.* field. What am I missing here?
I'm largely asking because I think struct hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping.dom
and .digl_list could actually overlay .gmsi, as much as struct
hvm_irq_dpci.hvm_timer could actually rather be folded into struct
hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping (and then also overlay .gmsi). The overlay
distinction bit would, based on initialization, be HVM_IRQ_DPCI_GUEST_MSI,
but according to use it wouldn't be clear which of the two
HVM_IRQ_DPCI_*_MSI bits is actually the correct one.
Having a single structure only would make it a lot easier to
convert struct hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping * in struct hvm_irq_dpci to
a sparse struct hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping ** (populating slots only
as they get used), thus shrinking the currently two d->nr_pirqs
sized array allocations in pt_irq_create_bind_vtd() to a single one
with only pointer size array elements (allowing up to about 512
domain pirqs rather than currently slightly above 80 without
exceeding PAGE_SIZE on allocation).
Also I'm wondering why the PT_IRQ_TYPE_MSI path of
pt_irq_create_bind_vtd() checks that on re-use of an IRQ the
flags are indicating the same kind of interrupt, while the other
path doesn't bother doing so.
Thanks, Jan
next reply other threads:[~2011-03-31 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-31 14:15 Jan Beulich [this message]
2011-04-21 7:14 ` use of struct hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping.gmsi vs. HVM_IRQ_DPCI_*_MSI flags Haitao Shan
2011-04-26 8:48 ` Jan Beulich
2011-04-27 2:49 ` Kay, Allen M
2011-04-27 6:43 ` Jan Beulich
2011-04-28 1:31 ` Haitao Shan
2011-04-28 20:27 ` Kay, Allen M
2011-04-29 7:05 ` Jan Beulich
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=4D94A88C0200007800039637@vpn.id2.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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).