Re: [v7 4/8] iommu, x86: No need to migrating irq for VT-d Posted-Interrupts

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Mon, 25 May 2015, Feng Wu wrote:

> 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.wu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c b/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c
> index 1955b09..646f4cf 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel_irq_remapping.c
> @@ -994,7 +994,10 @@ 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->pst != 1)
> +		modify_irte(&ir_data->irq_2_iommu, irte);

I don't think this is correct. ir_data->irte_entry contains the non
posted version, which has pst == 0.

You need some other way to store whether you are in posted mode or
not.

Thanks,

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