On 02/03/18 13:53, Andre Przywara wrote:
On 26/02/18 16:30, Julien Grall wrote:
On 02/26/2018 04:25 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
On 26/02/18 15:55, Julien Grall wrote:
On 02/26/2018 03:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
On 13/02/18 16:35, Julien Grall wrote:
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/xen/arch/arm/vgic/vgic.c
index f4f2a04a60..9e7fb1edcb 100644
@@ -646,6 +646,38 @@ void gic_inject(void)
+static int vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(struct vcpu *vcpu)
+ struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
+ struct vgic_irq *irq;
+ bool pending = false;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ if ( !vcpu->domain->arch.vgic.enabled )
+ return false;
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock, flags);
+ list_for_each_entry(irq, &vgic_cpu->ap_list_head, ap_list)
+ pending = irq_is_pending(irq) && irq->enabled;
+ if ( pending )
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock, flags);
+ return pending;
You probably want to rename that function or just expose
Rename to what? I need both functions: vgic_vcpu_pending_irq() is also
called by vgic_kick_vcpus() (later in the series).
And gic_events_need_delivery(void) is the interface that the arch code
expects. Shall I rename this there? To what?
Let me start with it is a bit odd to have a function name 'gic_*' in the
virtual GIC code. So at least renaming to vgic_events_need_delivery
would be an improvement.
Regarding the interface itself, it is ARM specific and not set in stone.
It would not be too bad to use vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(current). Is there
any reason for not doing that?
The two interfaces used for that purpose are different in the two VGICs:
- The old VGIC only works on the current VCPU, since it peeks into the
GICH_ register to learn the priority (regardless of whether this is
really needed or useful).
- The new VGIC can use this function for any VCPU, and we need this
functionality later on (when we iterate over all VCPUs).
So we can't use a function hardwiring "current", that would break
vgic_kick_vcpus() in the new VGIC. And we can't pass a VCPU parameter,
that would not work for the old VGIC.
So I believe having this small wrapper here is the easiest solution.
I will add a patch to rename this function to vgic_pending_irq(),
though, so this one here looks like:
We can clean this up when the old VGIC gets removed.
Likely no-one in the old vGIC are going to call that function with v !=
current. This would not be the only place in Xen where a vCPU is taken
in parameter but effectively v can only be current. That's where
ASSERT(v == current) comes into place.
Xen-devel mailing list