On 24.10.2024 17:48, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/io_apic.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/io_apic.c
> @@ -71,6 +71,24 @@ static int apic_pin_2_gsi_irq(int apic, int pin);
>
> static vmask_t *__read_mostly vector_map[MAX_IO_APICS];
>
> +/*
> + * Store the EOI handle when using interrupt remapping.
> + *
> + * If using AMD-Vi interrupt remapping the IO-APIC redirection entry remapped
> + * format repurposes the vector field to store the offset into the Interrupt
> + * Remap table. This causes directed EOI to longer work, as the CPU vector
> no
> + * longer matches the contents of the RTE vector field. Add a translation
> + * table so that directed EOI uses the value in the RTE vector field when
> + * interrupt remapping is enabled.
> + *
> + * Note Intel VT-d Xen code still stores the CPU vector in the RTE vector
> field
> + * when using the remapped format, but use the translation table uniformly in
> + * order to avoid extra logic to differentiate between VT-d and AMD-Vi.
> + *
> + * The matrix is accessed as [#io-apic][#pin].
> + */
> +static uint8_t **io_apic_pin_eoi;
Wasn't the conclusion from the v1 discussion that this needs to be a signed
type wider than 8 bits?
> @@ -298,6 +323,9 @@ static void __io_apic_eoi(unsigned int apic, unsigned int
> vector, unsigned int p
> /* Prefer the use of the EOI register if available */
> if ( ioapic_has_eoi_reg(apic) )
> {
> + if ( io_apic_pin_eoi )
> + vector = io_apic_pin_eoi[apic][pin];
> +
> /* If vector is unknown, read it from the IO-APIC */
> if ( vector == IRQ_VECTOR_UNASSIGNED )
> vector = __ioapic_read_entry(apic, pin, true).vector;
In addition to what Andrew said here, for this comparison the make sense
...
> @@ -1022,7 +1050,20 @@ static void __init setup_IO_APIC_irqs(void)
>
> apic_printk(APIC_VERBOSE, KERN_DEBUG "init IO_APIC IRQs\n");
>
> + if ( iommu_intremap )
> + {
> + io_apic_pin_eoi = xzalloc_array(typeof(*io_apic_pin_eoi),
> nr_ioapics);
> + BUG_ON(!io_apic_pin_eoi);
> + }
> +
> for (apic = 0; apic < nr_ioapics; apic++) {
> + if ( iommu_intremap )
> + {
> + io_apic_pin_eoi[apic] = xzalloc_array(typeof(**io_apic_pin_eoi),
> + nr_ioapic_entries[apic]);
> + BUG_ON(!io_apic_pin_eoi[apic]);
> + }
... doesn't the array also need -1 (== IRQ_VECTOR_UNASSIGNED) filling,
rather than zero-filling?
Jan
