[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55955290.1030009@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 17:02:40 +0200
From: Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org>
To: Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@...sung.com>, eric.auger@...com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
christoffer.dall@...aro.org, andre.przywara@....com,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@...r.kernel.org
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...aro.org,
pbonzini@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] KVM: arm: implement kvm_set_msi by gsi direct mapping
Hi Pavel,
On 07/02/2015 09:53 AM, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: kvm-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:kvm-owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Eric Auger
>> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 6:37 PM
>> To: eric.auger@...com; eric.auger@...aro.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org;
>> marc.zyngier@....com; christoffer.dall@...aro.org; andre.przywara@....com;
>> kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu; kvm@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; patches@...aro.org; p.fedin@...sung.com; pbonzini@...hat.com
>> Subject: [PATCH 7/7] KVM: arm: implement kvm_set_msi by gsi direct mapping
>>
>> If the ITS modality is not available, let's simply support MSI
>> injection by transforming the MSI.data into an SPI ID.
>>
>> This becomes possible to use KVM_SIGNAL_MSI ioctl for arm too.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/kvm/Kconfig | 1 +
>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 5 +++++
>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/kvm/Kconfig
>> index 151e710..0f58baf 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/Kconfig
>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ config KVM
>> select KVM_VFIO
>> select HAVE_KVM_EVENTFD
>> select HAVE_KVM_IRQFD
>> + select HAVE_KVM_MSI
>> select HAVE_KVM_IRQCHIP
>> select HAVE_KVM_IRQ_ROUTING
>> depends on ARM_VIRT_EXT && ARM_LPAE && ARM_ARCH_TIMER
>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>> index 0b4c48c..b3c10dc 100644
>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>> @@ -2314,6 +2314,11 @@ int kvm_set_msi(struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry *e,
>> return kvm->arch.vgic.vm_ops.inject_msi(kvm, &msi);
>> else
>> return -ENODEV;
>> + case KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI:
>> + if (kvm->arch.vgic.vm_ops.inject_msi)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + else
>> + return kvm_vgic_inject_irq(kvm, 0, e->msi.data, level);
>
> Given API change i suggest (using KVM_MSI_VALID_DEVID flag), we could get rid of all these if()'s
> here. Just forward all parameters to vGIC implementation code and let it do its checks.
I don't understand this comment. Here this is the kernel struct that is
used (struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry) and not the user one
(kvm_irq_routing_entry). The kernel struct does not have the flag field.
Another reason I think to keep using the type for homogeneity. To be
noted that in the kernel struct, the devid is passed in
kvm_extended_msi, as you suggested for the user-space struct.
Thanks
Eric
>
>> default:
>> return -EINVAL;
>> }
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> Kind regards,
> Pavel Fedin
> Expert Engineer
> Samsung Electronics Research center Russia
>
>
--
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