[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [RFC XEN PATCH v8 5/5] domctl: Add XEN_DOMCTL_gsi_permission to grant gsi
On 2024/6/4 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 04.06.2024 05:04, Chen, Jiqian wrote: >> On 2024/5/30 23:51, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 30.05.2024 13:19, Chen, Jiqian wrote: >>>> On 2024/5/29 20:22, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 29.05.2024 13:13, Chen, Jiqian wrote: >>>>>> On 2024/5/29 15:10, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>> On 29.05.2024 08:56, Chen, Jiqian wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2024/5/29 14:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 29.05.2024 04:41, Chen, Jiqian wrote: >>>>>>>>>> But I found in function init_irq_data: >>>>>>>>>> for ( irq = 0; irq < nr_irqs_gsi; irq++ ) >>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>> int rc; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> desc = irq_to_desc(irq); >>>>>>>>>> desc->irq = irq; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> rc = init_one_irq_desc(desc); >>>>>>>>>> if ( rc ) >>>>>>>>>> return rc; >>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>> Does it mean that when irq < nr_irqs_gsi, the gsi and irq is a 1:1 >>>>>>>>>> mapping? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No, as explained before. I also don't see how you would derive that >>>>>>>>> from the code above. >>>>>>>> Because here set desc->irq = irq, and it seems there is no other place >>>>>>>> to change this desc->irq, so, gsi 1 is considered to irq 1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What are you taking this from? The loop bound isn't nr_gsis, and the >>>>>>> iteration >>>>>>> variable isn't in GSI space either; it's in IRQ numbering space. In >>>>>>> this loop >>>>>>> we're merely leveraging that every GSI has a corresponding IRQ; >>>>>>> there are no assumptions made about the mapping between the two. Afaics >>>>>>> at least. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "nr_irqs_gsi" describes what its name says: The number of >>>>>>>>> IRQs mapping to a (_some_) GSI. That's to tell them from the non-GSI >>>>>>>>> (i.e. >>>>>>>>> mainly MSI) ones. There's no implication whatsoever on the IRQ <-> GSI >>>>>>>>> mapping. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What's more, when using PHYSDEVOP_setup_gsi, it calls >>>>>>>>>> mp_register_gsi, >>>>>>>>>> and in mp_register_gsi, it uses " desc = irq_to_desc(gsi); " to get >>>>>>>>>> irq_desc directly. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which may be wrong, while that wrong-ness may not have hit anyone in >>>>>>>>> practice (for reasons that would need working out). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Combining above, can we consider "gsi == irq" when irq < nr_irqs_gsi >>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Again - no. >>>>>>>> Since you are certain that they are not equal, could you tell me where >>>>>>>> show they are not equal or where build their mappings, >>>>>>>> so that I can know how to do a conversion gsi from irq. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I did point you at the ACPI Interrupt Source Override structure before. >>>>>>> We're parsing those in acpi_parse_int_src_ovr(), to give you a place to >>>>>>> start going from. >>>>>> Oh! I think I know. >>>>>> If I want to transform gsi to irq, I need to do below: >>>>>> int irq, entry, ioapic, pin; >>>>>> >>>>>> ioapic = mp_find_ioapic(gsi); >>>>>> pin = gsi - mp_ioapic_routing[ioapic].gsi_base; >>>>>> entry = find_irq_entry(ioapic, pin, mp_INT); >>>>>> irq = pin_2_irq(entry, ioapic, pin); >>>>>> >>>>>> Am I right? >>>>> >>>>> This looks plausible, yes. >>>> I dump all mpc_config_intsrc of array mp_irqs, it shows: >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 0 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 2 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 15 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 9 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 9 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 1 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 1 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 3 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 3 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 4 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 4 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 5 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 5 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 6 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 6 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 7 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 7 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 8 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 8 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 10 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 10 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 11 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 11 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 12 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 12 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 13 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 13 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 14 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 14 >>>> (XEN) find_irq_entry type 3 irqtype 0 irqflag 0 srcbus 0 srcbusirq 15 >>>> dstapic 33 dstirq 15 >>>> >>>> It seems only Legacy irq and gsi[0:15] has a mapping in mp_irqs. >>>> Other gsi can be considered 1:1 mapping with irq? Or are there other >>>> places reflect the mapping between irq and gsi? >>> >>> It may be uncommon to have overrides for higher GSIs, but I don't think ACPI >>> disallows that. >> Do you suggest me to add overrides for higher GSIs into array mp_irqs? > > Why "add"? That's what mp_override_legacy_irq() already does, isn't it? No. mp_override_legacy_irq only overrides for gsi < 16, but not for gsi >= 16(I dump all mappings from array mp_irqs). In my environment, gsi of my dGPU is 24. So, how do I process for gsi >= 16? > Assuming of course any are surfaced at all by ACPI. > > Jan -- Best regards, Jiqian Chen.
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |