Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC: extend !vgic_is_initialized guard
Hi Andre, On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 05:58:21PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against > !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been > initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure. > However the vgic_get_irq() call in the variable declaration sneaked > through the net, so lets make sure that this also gets called only after > we actually allocated the arrays this function accesses. > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara> --- > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > index e54ef2fdf73d..967983a33ab2 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > @@ -786,13 +786,14 @@ void vgic_kick_vcpus(struct kvm *kvm) > > bool kvm_vgic_map_is_active(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int virt_irq) > { > - struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); > + struct vgic_irq *irq; > bool map_is_active; > unsigned long flags; > > if (!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm)) > return false; > > + irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); > spin_lock_irqsave(>irq_lock, flags); > map_is_active = irq->hw && irq->active; > spin_unlock_irqrestore(>irq_lock, flags); > -- > 2.14.1 > As explained in the other e-mail this isn't actually strictly necessary anymore, but I think our current appraoch of "how do we handle calls from generic code the VGIC when the VGIC potentially hasn't been initialized yet?" is to have an initialized check on most entry points to the VGIC, unless strictly performance sensitive. Therefore: Reviewed-by: Christoffer Dall ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC: extend !vgic_is_initialized guard
Hi Andre, On 17/11/2017 18:58, Andre Przywara wrote: > Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against > !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been > initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure. > However the vgic_get_irq() call in the variable declaration sneaked > through the net, so lets make sure that this also gets called only after > we actually allocated the arrays this function accesses. > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywaraactually it does not directly apply on kvmarm/next. There is a small conflict with 47bbd31 KVM: arm/arm64: vgic: restructure kvm_vgic_(un)map_phys_irq I think. Cheers Eric > --- > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > index e54ef2fdf73d..967983a33ab2 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > @@ -786,13 +786,14 @@ void vgic_kick_vcpus(struct kvm *kvm) > > bool kvm_vgic_map_is_active(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int virt_irq) > { > - struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); > + struct vgic_irq *irq; > bool map_is_active; > unsigned long flags; > > if (!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm)) > return false; > > + irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); > spin_lock_irqsave(>irq_lock, flags); > map_is_active = irq->hw && irq->active; > spin_unlock_irqrestore(>irq_lock, flags); > ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC: extend !vgic_is_initialized guard
Hi Andre, On 17/11/2017 18:58, Andre Przywara wrote: > Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against > !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been > initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure. > However the vgic_get_irq() call in the variable declaration sneaked > through the net, so lets make sure that this also gets called only after > we actually allocated the arrays this function accesses. > > Signed-off-by: Andre PrzywaraReviewed-by: Eric Auger Thanks Eric > --- > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > index e54ef2fdf73d..967983a33ab2 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c > @@ -786,13 +786,14 @@ void vgic_kick_vcpus(struct kvm *kvm) > > bool kvm_vgic_map_is_active(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int virt_irq) > { > - struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); > + struct vgic_irq *irq; > bool map_is_active; > unsigned long flags; > > if (!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm)) > return false; > > + irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); > spin_lock_irqsave(>irq_lock, flags); > map_is_active = irq->hw && irq->active; > spin_unlock_irqrestore(>irq_lock, flags); > ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
[PATCH] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC: extend !vgic_is_initialized guard
Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure. However the vgic_get_irq() call in the variable declaration sneaked through the net, so lets make sure that this also gets called only after we actually allocated the arrays this function accesses. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara--- virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c index e54ef2fdf73d..967983a33ab2 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c @@ -786,13 +786,14 @@ void vgic_kick_vcpus(struct kvm *kvm) bool kvm_vgic_map_is_active(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int virt_irq) { - struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); + struct vgic_irq *irq; bool map_is_active; unsigned long flags; if (!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm)) return false; + irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, virt_irq); spin_lock_irqsave(>irq_lock, flags); map_is_active = irq->hw && irq->active; spin_unlock_irqrestore(>irq_lock, flags); -- 2.14.1 ___ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm