On 3 July 2015 at 10:50, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On 02/07/15 17:23, Christoffer Dall wrote:
If we had a different *shared* device than the timer which is
edge-triggered, don't we then also need to capture the physical
distributor's pending state along with the state of the
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 07:18:40PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 01/07/15 12:58, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:17:52AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 30/06/15 21:19, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 06:04:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
We only set the
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:17:52AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 30/06/15 21:19, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 06:04:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
We only set the irq_queued flag for level interrupts, meaning
that !vgic_irq_is_queued(vcpu, irq) is a good enough predicate
On 30/06/15 21:19, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 06:04:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
We only set the irq_queued flag for level interrupts, meaning
that !vgic_irq_is_queued(vcpu, irq) is a good enough predicate
for all interrupts.
This will allow us to inject edge HW
We only set the irq_queued flag for level interrupts, meaning
that !vgic_irq_is_queued(vcpu, irq) is a good enough predicate
for all interrupts.
This will allow us to inject edge HW interrupts, for which the
state ACTIVE+PENDING is not allowed.
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com
