From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/MSI: fix guest unmasking when handling
 IRQ via event channel
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 12:14:09 +0100
Message-ID: <559D0601.3090009@citrix.com>
References: <559D01DE020000780008E03C@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<559CEFD5.6020906@citrix.com>
	<559D1E58020000780008E1E6@mail.emea.novell.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=624fe8c97=david.vrabel@citrix.com>)
	id 1ZCnIu-000828-F5
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2015 11:14:16 +0000
In-Reply-To: <559D1E58020000780008E1E6@mail.emea.novell.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: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, TimDeegan <tim@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@eu.citrix.com>, SanderEikelenboom <linux@eikelenboom.it>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 08/07/15 11:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 08.07.15 at 11:39, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 08/07/15 09:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> Rather than assuming only PV guests need special treatment (and
>>> dealing with that directly when an IRQ gets set up), keep all guest MSI
>>> IRQs masked until either the (HVM) guest unmasks them via vMSI or the
>>> (PV, PVHVM, or PVH) guest sets up an event channel for it.
>>>
>>> To not further clutter the common evtchn_bind_pirq() with x86-specific
>>> code, introduce an arch_evtchn_bind_pirq() hook instead.
>>
>> Can you describe the symptoms of the bug being fixed here?
> 
> Interrupts simply didn't get unmasked for PVHVM Linux guests.
> 
>>> --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/irq.h
>>> @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ int release_guest_irq(struct domain *d, 
>>>  
>>>  void arch_move_irqs(struct vcpu *v);
>>>  
>>> +#define arch_evtchn_bind_pirq(d, pirq) ((void)((d) + (pirq)))
>>
>> Would this be better as a inline function?
>>
>>> +
>>>  /* Set IRQ type for an SPI */
>>>  int irq_set_spi_type(unsigned int spi, unsigned int type);
>>>  
>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/irq.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/irq.h
>>> @@ -172,4 +172,8 @@ unsigned int set_desc_affinity(struct ir
>>>  unsigned int arch_hwdom_irqs(domid_t);
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>> +#ifndef arch_evtchn_bind_pirq
>>> +void arch_evtchn_bind_pirq(struct domain *, int pirq);
>>
>> ... moving this into xen/include/asm-x86/irq.h
> 
> Oh, right, (also to Julien) - this is exactly the reason I do not want it
> to be an inline function for ARM: I want the declaration here, not
> replicated in every interested arch's header.

Ok.

FWIW, with this requirement I would (instead of the macros) add a weak
arch_evtchn_bind_pirq() that's a no-op.

David