Re: [PATCH 31/35] irqchip/gic-v4.1: Eagerly vmap vPEs

[Marc Zyngier]

On 2019-09-28 04:11, Zenghui Yu wrote:
> On 2019/9/24 2:26, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > Now that we have HW-accelerated SGIs being delivered to VPEs, it
> > becomes required to map the VPEs on all ITSs instead of relying
> > on the lazy approach that we would use when using the ITS-list
> > mechanism.
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c | 39 
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >   1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c 
> > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> > index 4aae9582182b..a1e8c4c2598a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> > @@ -1417,12 +1417,31 @@ static int its_irq_set_irqchip_state(struct 
> > irq_data *d,
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
> >   +/*
> > + * Two favourable cases:
> > + *
> > + * (a) Either we have a GICv4.1, and all vPEs have to be mapped at 
> > all times
> > + *     for vSGI delivery
> > + *
> > + * (b) Or the ITSs do not use a list map, meaning that VMOVP is 
> > cheap enough
> > + *     and we're better off mapping all VPEs always
> > + *
> > + * If neither (a) nor (b) is true, then we map VLPIs on demand.
>                                                  ^^^^^
> vPEs

Yes, well caught.

Thanks,

        M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...