Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

[Boris Ostrovsky]

On 04/12/2016 05:14 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > > > On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit
> > > > > 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen
> > > > > when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by
> > > > > probe_8259A but actually there are 16.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any suggestions on how to fix this?
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) we could revert 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8
> > > > > 2) we could introduce an 'if (!xen_domain())' in probe_8259A
> > > > > 3) suggestions welcome
> > > > Stefano, do you have b4ff8389ed14b849354b59ce9b360bdefcdbf99c ?
> > > >
> > > > It was supposed to fix this problem for Xen. However, I just noticed that
> > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h makes nr_legacy_irqs() return 0 (unlike
> > > > arch/arm/include/asm/irq.h). Could that be the problem?
> > > I have b4ff8389ed14b849354b59ce9b360bdefcdbf99c but it doesn't fix the
> > > issue for me.
> > >
> > > Is the idea of your patch that xen_allocate_irq_gsi will allocate the
> > > descriptor dynamically instead?
> > Right.
> >
> > > If so, it doesn't work because it
> > > doesn't get called for irq 14:
> > So how has it worked until now then?
> It didn't for me :-)
> Maybe it was working for DomUs, but not for Dom0?

I most certainly run this as both dom0 and domU on variety of machines.

So perhaps there is some other problem?

> > > piix_init_one -> ata_pci_sff_activate_host -> devm_request_irq ->
> > > devm_request_threaded_irq-> request_threaded_irq -> irq_to_desc(14) ->
> > > -EVAIL
> > >
> > > If you look at pci_xen_initial_domain, the loop:
> > >
> > > for (irq = 0; irq < nr_legacy_irqs(); irq++) {
> > >
> > > won't work anymore because by the time is called, nr_legacy_irqs()
> > > already returns 0, because it has been changed by probe_8259A().
> > >
> > > We also need the following patch:
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > xen/x86: actually allocate legacy interrupts on PV guests
> > >
> > > b4ff8389ed14 is incomplete: relies on nr_legacy_irqs() to get the number
> > > of legacy interrupts when actually nr_legacy_irqs() returns 0 after
> > > probe_8259A(). Use NR_IRQS_LEGACY instead.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/xen.c b/arch/x86/pci/xen.c
> > > index beac4df..6db0060 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/pci/xen.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/pci/xen.c
> > > @@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ int __init pci_xen_initial_domain(void)
> > >    	__acpi_register_gsi = acpi_register_gsi_xen;
> > >    	__acpi_unregister_gsi = NULL;
> > >    	/* Pre-allocate legacy irqs */
> > > -	for (irq = 0; irq < nr_legacy_irqs(); irq++) {
> > > +	for (irq = 0; irq < NR_IRQS_LEGACY; irq++) {
> > >    		int trigger, polarity;
> > >      		if (acpi_get_override_irq(irq, &trigger, &polarity) == -1)
> >
> > Won't we need the same change in the 'if (0 == nr_ioapics)' clause?
> That's not a problem: there is 1 ioapic in my system and is detected
> correctly.

True, but if a system has no ioapics then we will again fail to manage 
the pirq, no?

-boris