Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Don't try to move a disabled irq

[Saidi, Ali]

Marc, 

> On May 31, 2020, at 6:10 AM, Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Not great indeed. But this is not, as far as I can tell, a GIC
>> driver problem.
>> 
>> The semantic of activate/deactivate (which maps to started/shutdown
>> in the IRQ code) is that the HW resources for a given interrupt are
>> only committed when the interrupt is activated. Trying to perform
>> actions involving the HW on an interrupt that isn't active cannot be
>> guaranteed to take effect.

Yes, then it absolutely makes sense to address it outside the GIC. 
>> 
>> I'd rather address it in the core code, by preventing set_affinity (and
>> potentially others) to take place when the interrupt is not in the
>> STARTED state. Userspace would get an error, which is perfectly
>> legitimate, and which it already has to deal with it for plenty of
>> other
>> reasons.
> 
> How about this:
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> index 453a8a0f4804..1a2ac1392c0f 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> @@ -147,7 +147,8 @@ cpumask_var_t irq_default_affinity;
> static bool __irq_can_set_affinity(struct irq_desc *desc)
> {
>       if (!desc || !irqd_can_balance(&desc->irq_data) ||
> -           !desc->irq_data.chip || !desc->irq_data.chip->irq_set_affinity)
> +           !desc->irq_data.chip || !desc->irq_data.chip->irq_set_affinity ||
> +           !irqd_is_started(&desc->irq_data))
>               return false;
>       return true;
> }

Confirmed I canât reproduce the issue with your fix. 

Thanks,
Ali