Wu, Feng wrote on 2014-12-19:
> 
> 
> Zhang, Yang Z wrote on 2014-12-18:
>> jiang....@linux.intel.com
>> Cc: eric.au...@linaro.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>> io...@lists.linux-foundation.org; k...@vger.kernel.org; Wu, Feng
>> Subject: RE: [v3 06/26] iommu, x86: No need to migrating irq for
>> VT-d Posted-Interrupts
>> 
>> Feng Wu wrote on 2014-12-12:
>>> We don't need to migrate the irqs for VT-d Posted-Interrupts here.
>>> When 'pst' is set in IRTE, the associated irq will be posted to
>>> guests instead of interrupt remapping. The destination of the
>>> interrupt is set in Posted-Interrupts Descriptor, and the
>>> migration happens during vCPU scheduling.
>>> 
>>> However, we still update the cached irte here, which can be used
>>> when changing back to remapping mode.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Feng Wu <feng...@intel.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Jiang Liu <jiang....@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c | 6 +++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git
>>> a/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c
>>> b/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c index 48c2051..ab9057a
>>> 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c +++
>>> b/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c @@ -977,6 +977,7 @@
>>> intel_ir_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data, const struct cpumask
>>> *mask,  {
>>>     struct intel_ir_data *ir_data = data->chip_data;        struct irte 
>>> *irte =
>>>  &ir_data->irte_entry; +    struct irte_pi *irte_pi = (struct irte_pi
>>>  *)irte;    struct irq_cfg *cfg = irqd_cfg(data);   struct irq_data *parent
>>>  = data->parent_data;       int ret;
>>> @@ -991,7 +992,10 @@ intel_ir_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data,
>>> const struct cpumask *mask,
>>>      */
>>>     irte->vector = cfg->vector;
>>>     irte->dest_id = IRTE_DEST(cfg->dest_apicid);
>>> -   modify_irte(&ir_data->irq_2_iommu, irte);
>>> +
>>> +   /* We don't need to modify irte if the interrupt is for posting. */
>>> +   if (irte_pi->pst != 1)
>>> +           modify_irte(&ir_data->irq_2_iommu, irte);
>> 
>> What happens if user changes the IRQ affinity manually?
> 
> If the IRQ is posted, its affinity is controlled by guest (irq <--->
> vCPU <----> pCPU), it has no effect when host changes its affinity.

That's the problem: User is able to changes it in host but it never takes 
effect since it is actually controlled by guest. I guess it will break the IRQ 
balance too.

> 
> Thanks,
> Feng
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>     /*
>>>      * After this point, all the interrupts will start arriving
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Yang
>>


Best regards,
Yang


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to