[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b665e102-eba9-cd4f-5b4e-ccbd77444233@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 22:52:24 +0800
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Kunkun Jiang <jiangkunkun@...wei.com>,
<wanghaibin.wang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Properly lock VPEs when doing a
directLPI invalidation
Hi Marc,
On 2023/6/17 15:32, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> We normally rely on the irq_to_cpuid_[un]lock() primitives to make
> sure nothing will change col->idx while performing a LPI invalidation.
"change col_idx while performing a vLPI invalidation"?
> However, these primitives do not cover VPE doorbells, and we have
> some open-coded locking for that. Unfortunately, this locking is
> pretty bogus.
>
> Instead, extend the above primitives to cover VPE doorbells and
> convert the whole thing to it.
>
> Fixes: f3a059219bc7 ("irqchip/gic-v4.1: Ensure mutual exclusion between vPE affinity change and RD access")
> Reported-by: Kunkun Jiang <jiangkunkun@...wei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> Cc: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
> Cc: wanghaibin.wang@...wei.com
Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
Nit: I think the Subject header can be changed to 'irqchip/gic-v4' as
the bug it fixes only affects GICv4 HW. v4.1 is unaffected.
Thanks,
Zenghui
Powered by blists - more mailing lists