Re: [PATCH v9 13/19] vfio/platform: support for level sensitive interrupts
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Alex Williamson
alex.william...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 19:07 +0100, Antonios Motakis wrote:
Level sensitive interrupts are exposed as maskable and automasked
interrupts and are masked and disabled automatically when they fire.
Signed-off-by: Antonios Motakis a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com
---
drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 102
+-
drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_private.h | 2 +
2 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
index 2ac8ed7..563abf6 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
@@ -31,18 +31,108 @@
#include vfio_platform_private.h
+static void vfio_platform_mask(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq_ctx)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (!irq_ctx-masked) {
+ disable_irq(irq_ctx-hwirq);
+ irq_ctx-masked = true;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+}
+
static int vfio_platform_set_irq_mask(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev,
unsigned index, unsigned start,
unsigned count, uint32_t flags, void *data)
{
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (start != 0 || count != 1)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!(vdev-irqs[index].flags VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_EVENTFD)
+ return -EINVAL; /* not implemented yet */
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE) {
+ vfio_platform_mask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+
+ } else if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_BOOL) {
+ uint8_t mask = *(uint8_t *)data;
+
+ if (mask)
+ vfio_platform_mask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void vfio_platform_unmask(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq_ctx)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (irq_ctx-masked) {
+ enable_irq(irq_ctx-hwirq);
+ irq_ctx-masked = false;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
}
static int vfio_platform_set_irq_unmask(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev,
unsigned index, unsigned start,
unsigned count, uint32_t flags, void *data)
{
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (start != 0 || count != 1)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!(vdev-irqs[index].flags VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_EVENTFD)
+ return -EINVAL; /* not implemented yet */
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE) {
+ vfio_platform_unmask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+
+ } else if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_BOOL) {
+ uint8_t unmask = *(uint8_t *)data;
+
+ if (unmask)
+ vfio_platform_unmask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static irqreturn_t vfio_maskable_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
+{
+ struct vfio_platform_irq *irq_ctx = dev_id;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ int ret = IRQ_NONE;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (!irq_ctx-masked) {
+ ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
+
+ /* automask maskable interrupts */
+ disable_irq_nosync(irq_ctx-hwirq);
+ irq_ctx-masked = true;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (ret == IRQ_HANDLED)
+ eventfd_signal(irq_ctx-trigger, 1);
+
+ return ret;
This is not just a maskable irq handler, but specifically a level (aka
automasked) handler. So this should only be used for AUTOMASKED irqs.
}
static irqreturn_t vfio_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
@@ -103,7 +193,7 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_irq_trigger(struct
vfio_platform_device *vdev,
irq_handler_t handler;
if (vdev-irqs[index].flags VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE)
- return -EINVAL; /* not implemented */
+ handler = vfio_maskable_irq_handler;
As noted in the previous patch, this should be a test for AUTOMASKED,
not just MASKABLE.
Ack.
Thanks for your comments.
Antonios
else
handler = vfio_irq_handler;
@@ -175,13 +265,17 @@ int vfio_platform_irq_init(struct vfio_platform_device
*vdev)
if (hwirq 0)
goto err;
+ spin_lock_init(vdev-irqs[i].lock);
+
vdev-irqs[i].flags = VFIO_IRQ_INFO_EVENTFD;
if (irq_get_trigger_type(hwirq) IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_MASK)
- vdev-irqs[i].flags |= VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE;
+ vdev-irqs[i].flags |= VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE
+
Re: [PATCH v9 13/19] vfio/platform: support for level sensitive interrupts
On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 19:07 +0100, Antonios Motakis wrote:
Level sensitive interrupts are exposed as maskable and automasked
interrupts and are masked and disabled automatically when they fire.
Signed-off-by: Antonios Motakis a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com
---
drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 102
+-
drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_private.h | 2 +
2 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
index 2ac8ed7..563abf6 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
@@ -31,18 +31,108 @@
#include vfio_platform_private.h
+static void vfio_platform_mask(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq_ctx)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (!irq_ctx-masked) {
+ disable_irq(irq_ctx-hwirq);
+ irq_ctx-masked = true;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+}
+
static int vfio_platform_set_irq_mask(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev,
unsigned index, unsigned start,
unsigned count, uint32_t flags, void *data)
{
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (start != 0 || count != 1)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!(vdev-irqs[index].flags VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_EVENTFD)
+ return -EINVAL; /* not implemented yet */
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE) {
+ vfio_platform_mask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+
+ } else if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_BOOL) {
+ uint8_t mask = *(uint8_t *)data;
+
+ if (mask)
+ vfio_platform_mask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void vfio_platform_unmask(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq_ctx)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (irq_ctx-masked) {
+ enable_irq(irq_ctx-hwirq);
+ irq_ctx-masked = false;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
}
static int vfio_platform_set_irq_unmask(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev,
unsigned index, unsigned start,
unsigned count, uint32_t flags, void *data)
{
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (start != 0 || count != 1)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!(vdev-irqs[index].flags VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_EVENTFD)
+ return -EINVAL; /* not implemented yet */
+
+ if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE) {
+ vfio_platform_unmask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+
+ } else if (flags VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_BOOL) {
+ uint8_t unmask = *(uint8_t *)data;
+
+ if (unmask)
+ vfio_platform_unmask(vdev-irqs[index]);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static irqreturn_t vfio_maskable_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
+{
+ struct vfio_platform_irq *irq_ctx = dev_id;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ int ret = IRQ_NONE;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (!irq_ctx-masked) {
+ ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
+
+ /* automask maskable interrupts */
+ disable_irq_nosync(irq_ctx-hwirq);
+ irq_ctx-masked = true;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(irq_ctx-lock, flags);
+
+ if (ret == IRQ_HANDLED)
+ eventfd_signal(irq_ctx-trigger, 1);
+
+ return ret;
This is not just a maskable irq handler, but specifically a level (aka
automasked) handler. So this should only be used for AUTOMASKED irqs.
}
static irqreturn_t vfio_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
@@ -103,7 +193,7 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_irq_trigger(struct
vfio_platform_device *vdev,
irq_handler_t handler;
if (vdev-irqs[index].flags VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE)
- return -EINVAL; /* not implemented */
+ handler = vfio_maskable_irq_handler;
As noted in the previous patch, this should be a test for AUTOMASKED,
not just MASKABLE.
else
handler = vfio_irq_handler;
@@ -175,13 +265,17 @@ int vfio_platform_irq_init(struct vfio_platform_device
*vdev)
if (hwirq 0)
goto err;
+ spin_lock_init(vdev-irqs[i].lock);
+
vdev-irqs[i].flags = VFIO_IRQ_INFO_EVENTFD;
if (irq_get_trigger_type(hwirq) IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_MASK)
- vdev-irqs[i].flags |= VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE;
+ vdev-irqs[i].flags |= VFIO_IRQ_INFO_MASKABLE
+ | VFIO_IRQ_INFO_AUTOMASKED;
vdev-irqs[i].count = 1;
