linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 08/16] xen/hvm/params: Add a new delivery type for event-channel in HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK

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: <569F4919.2040502@huawei.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:45:13 +0800
From:	Shannon Zhao <zhaoshenglong@...wei.com>
To:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
CC:	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, <stefano.stabellini@...rix.com>,
	<david.vrabel@...rix.com>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<catalin.marinas@....com>, <will.deacon@....com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	<julien.grall@...rix.com>, <shannon.zhao@...aro.org>,
	<peter.huangpeng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 08/16] xen/hvm/params: Add a new delivery
 type for event-channel in HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_IRQ



On 2016/1/20 16:39, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 20/01/2016 06:33, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>> >
>> > On 2016/1/18 20:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> >> On 18/01/16 12:46, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>>> >>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>> On 18/01/16 12:38, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@...aro.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Add a new delivery type:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> val[63:56] == 3: val[15:8] is flag: val[7:0] is a PPI.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To the flag, bit 0 stands the interrupt mode is edge(1) or level(0) and
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> bit 1 stands the interrupt polarity is active low(1) or high(0).
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@...aro.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>  include/xen/interface/hvm/params.h | 5 +++++
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/xen/interface/hvm/params.h b/include/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> index a6c7991..550688a 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --- a/include/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/include/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> @@ -34,6 +34,11 @@
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>   *                  Domain = val[47:32], Bus  = val[31:16],
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>   *                  DevFn  = val[15: 8], IntX = val[ 1: 0]
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>   * val[63:56] == 2: val[7:0] is a vector number.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + * val[63:56] == 3: val[15:8] is flag of event-channel interrupt:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + *                      bit 0: interrupt is edge(1) or level(0) triggered
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + *                      bit 1: interrupt is active low(1) or high(0)
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + *                  val[7:0] is PPI number used by event-channel.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + *                  This is only used by ARM/ARM64.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>   * If val == 0 then CPU0 event-channel notifications are not delivered.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>   */
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>  #define HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_IRQ 0
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andrew, I think that this patch is correct. Looking back at your
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> previous comment (http://marc.info/?l=devicetree&m=144804014214262&w=2),
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> is it possible that you were confused by enum callback_via_type, which
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> is internal to Xen and offset'ed by 1 compared to the described values
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> in xen/include/public/hvm/params.h?
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If not, and indeed somebody introduced one more field but failed to
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> document it, then I suggest she sends a patch to fix the issue as soon
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> as possible.
>>>>>>> >>>>>> I was indeed confused - the ABI is utterly mad.
>>>>> >>>> All right. In that case, Shannon, you can add my
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> However, this change does need rebasing over c/s ca5c54b, which was the
>>>>>>> >>>>>> result of the original discussion.
>>>>> >>>> c/s ca5c54b is for Xen, while this is a Linux patch (Linux has its own
>>>>> >>>> set of Xen headers).
>>> >> All ABI changes need to happen in the Xen public headers first.  This
>>> >> patch cannot be accepted yet.
>> > So you mean it should port c/s ca5c54b to Linux first? Then add this
>> > change based on that?
> FIrst, you must get this content and submit a patch against Xen.  The
> Xen repository is the authoritative version of the ABI.
> 
I've sent a patch to Xen, but not applied yet.

> Once that patch is accepted, you will need to port ca5c54b and the new
> patch as part of this series.
Ok, thanks.

-- 
Shannon