linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120628084105.GE12447@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:41:05 +0300
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
Cc:	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, avi@...hat.com,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jan.kiszka@...mens.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:35:41AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:34:35AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 09:34:31AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 01:31:29AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:04:18PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 18:26 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:09:46PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > > > @@ -71,6 +130,14 @@ irqfd_inject(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > > > >  	kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 0);
> > > > > > >  }
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > +static void
> > > > > > > +irqfd_inject_level(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > +	struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(work, struct _irqfd, inject);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	kvm_set_irq(irqfd->kvm, irqfd->source->id, irqfd->gsi, 1);
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > >  /*
> > > > > > >   * Race-free decouple logic (ordering is critical)
> > > > > > >   */
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why is it safe to ignore return value here?
> > > > > > needs a comment.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Well, it seems like you and Gleb came to the conclusion that it's safe,
> > > > > but I can really follow from the list thread.  Can you explain and I'll
> > > > > add a comment?  Thanks,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Alex
> > > > 
> > > > We merely talked about edge interrupts.
> > > > 
> > > In fact it would have been nice to return -EBUSY when write() to level
> > > irqfd is coalesced.
> > 
> > Possibly nice but not really practical.
> > 
> What do you mean by that? Impossible to implement or not useful?

Impossible to implement and also does not match normal eventfd
semantics.

> --
> 			Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/