[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d0b5e7d5-3503-49be-9fa3-4b79c62059ca@suse.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 12:21:45 +0200
From: Jürgen Groß <jgross@...e.com>
To: "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@....com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, "Rafael J . Wysocki"
<rafael@...nel.org>, Roger Pau Monné
<roger.pau@...rix.com>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"Huang, Ray" <Ray.Huang@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC KERNEL PATCH v6 3/3] xen/privcmd: Add new syscall to get gsi
from irq
On 10.05.24 12:13, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/10 17:53, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> On 10.05.24 11:06, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2024/5/10 14:46, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>>> On 19.04.24 05:36, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>>>> +
>>>>> + info->type = IRQT_PIRQ;
>>> I am considering whether I need to use a new type(like IRQT_GSI) here to distinguish with IRQT_PIRQ, because function restore_pirqs will process all IRQT_PIRQ.
>>
>> restore_pirqs() already considers gsi == 0 to be not GSI related. Isn't this
>> enough?
> No, it is not enough.
> xen_pvh_add_gsi_irq_map adds the mapping of gsi and irq, but the value of gsi is not 0,
> once restore_pirqs is called, it will do PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq for that gsi, but in pvh dom0, we shouldn't do PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq.
Okay, then add a new flag to info->u.pirq.flags for that purpose?
Juergen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists