[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <529EB629.1020605@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 12:57:13 +0800
From: DuanZhenzhong <zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Sucheta Chakraborty <sucheta.chakraborty@...gic.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Introduce two new MSI infrastructure calls for masking/unmasking.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 09:44:09AM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>
>> On 2013-11-07 07:51, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>
>>> [+cc Thomas, Ingo, Peter, x86 list]
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>>> <konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Certain platforms do not allow writes in the MSI-X bars
>>>> to setup or tear down vector values. To combat against
>>>> the generic code trying to write to that and either silently
>>>> being ignored or crashing due to the pagetables being marked r/o
>>>> this patch introduces a platform over-write.
>>>>
>>>> Note that we keep two separate, non-weak, functions
>>>> default_mask_msi_irqs() and default_mask_msix_irqs() for the
>>>> behavior of the arch_mask_msi_irqs() and arch_mask_msix_irqs(),
>>>> as the default behavior is needed by x86 PCI code.
>>>>
>>>> For Xen, which does not allow the guest to write to MSI-X
>>>> tables - as the hypervisor is solely responsible for setting
>>>> the vector values - we implement two nops.
>>>>
>>>> CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
>>>> CC: Sucheta Chakraborty <sucheta.chakraborty@...gic.com>
>>>> CC: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
>>>>
>>> I think this is safe, and I'd like to squeeze it into the v3.13 merge
>>> window next week, since it supersedes three patches Zhenzhong has been
>>> trying to get in since July [1], and this patch is much simpler to
>>> understand.
>>>
>> This patch could replace the first two.
>> I think the third patch of mine is still needed as it does a
>> different thing.
>> It optimizes restore path in dom0.
>>
>
> I tried to rebase it on top of this patch but it ended up that
> you still need the two arguments (for restore_... operation).
>
> But perhaps there is a better way. If you can rebase on top
> of this patch - and send it out - that would be great!
>
Ok, I'll send one rebased on your patch later.
--
Regards
zhenzhong
--
Oracle Building, No.24 Building, Zhongguancun Software Park
Haidian District, Beijing 100193, China
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists