Sheng Yang wrote:

  struct kvm_assigned_msix_nr {
        __u32 assigned_dev_id;
        __u16 entry_nr;
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 4010802..d3acb37 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -280,13 +280,33 @@ static void kvm_free_assigned_irq(struct kvm *kvm,
         * now, the kvm state is still legal for probably we also have to wait
         * interrupt_work done.
         */
-       disable_irq_nosync(assigned_dev->host_irq);
-       cancel_work_sync(&assigned_dev->interrupt_work);
+       if (assigned_dev->irq_requested_type & KVM_ASSIGNED_DEV_MSIX) {
+               int i;
+               for (i = 0; i < assigned_dev->entries_nr; i++)
+                       disable_irq_nosync(assigned_dev->
+                                          host_msix_entries[i].vector);
+
+               cancel_work_sync(&assigned_dev->interrupt_work);
+
+               for (i = 0; i < assigned_dev->entries_nr; i++)
+                       free_irq(assigned_dev->host_msix_entries[i].vector,
+                                (void *)assigned_dev);
+
+               assigned_dev->entries_nr = 0;
+               kfree(assigned_dev->host_msix_entries);
+               kfree(assigned_dev->guest_msix_entries);
+               pci_disable_msix(assigned_dev->dev);
+       } else {
+               /* Deal with MSI and INTx */
+               disable_irq_nosync(assigned_dev->host_irq);
+               cancel_work_sync(&assigned_dev->interrupt_work);
How about always have an array? That will also allow us to deal with INTx where x=B,C,D.

Currently for MSI and INTx the array will hold just one active element.

So array, or bitmap? I remember I changed it to bitmap accounding to your
first comment...

Which bitmap?  I'm confused.

I'm talking about unifying the existing array (assigned_dev->host_msix_entries[]) with ->host_irq. Also since we need an array for INTx when a function uses INT[BCD].

So we'll have assigned_dev->host_irqs[], each entry can be INTx or MSI or MSIx.

OK. I think array is reasonable, but the length is a problem, as I did before. 
How long would you like?

MAX(4, KVM_MAX_MSIX_ENTRIES), no?

--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to