[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5474225b-d4b7-b565-75d6-3d61113caba0@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:28:38 +0800
From: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Kunkun Jiang <jiangkunkun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v4: Don't allow a VMOVP on a dying VPE
On 2024/10/23 22:23, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> index ab597e74ba08e..52f625e07658c 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> @@ -3810,8 +3810,18 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
> * Check if we're racing against a VPE being destroyed, for
> * which we don't want to allow a VMOVP.
> */
> - if (!atomic_read(&vpe->vmapp_count))
> - return -EINVAL;
> + if (!atomic_read(&vpe->vmapp_count)) {
> + if (gic_requires_eager_mapping())
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /*
> + * If we lazily map the VPEs, this isn't an error and
> + * we can exit cleanly.
> + */
> + cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val);
> + irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
> + return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
> + }
>
> /*
> * Changing affinity is mega expensive, so let's be as lazy as
Looks good, thanks!
Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists