From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga08-in.huawei.com (szxga08-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.255]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D38FE1CF295 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 11:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.255 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729769326; cv=none; b=TDRQYspyiM1Ic2hbGeku75PIh9BR13LQYXwWMLCnH0pirOnupV0tvwq9LwPn0iJabgKhpy3F+pS9YtyIsdGlAFGOKhcwoswcQTh/5Rxbys3Dd6T2gcs3mXytagX3huX+XpLWAZCKNKrIz6ldEhCYT9Q0SGdJ1KwYqMpMRXMYAmQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729769326; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gRiAaL9U+lFGWbjTS0fokEV0D/5yUyE7EjflX9Nll0I=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=L0XI0wGQ4YS+X+iuqfDIJsiMRrMw1fWqkWOV0DxFuQzR5u9TBHdr+Idz20ROGYSM2Fp6QKutMA8xX5bpivjqXhk0zueEIbyRUc+FhBhsTkWTFG8MwmORGMAojnByJbFIu9oDew3zRjC4swSlOWOG4Nb7mhiDRgov4wkgATbfsz8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.255 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.252]) by szxga08-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4XZ3XF477Wz1T8xQ; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:26:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemm600007.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.193.23.208]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BD5D1800DB; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:28:40 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.219] (10.174.178.219) by kwepemm600007.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.208) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:28:39 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v4: Don't allow a VMOVP on a dying VPE To: Marc Zyngier CC: , , Thomas Gleixner , Kunkun Jiang References: <20241002204959.2051709-1-maz@kernel.org> <87wmhztd9z.wl-maz@kernel.org> <8634km5250.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Zenghui Yu Message-ID: <5474225b-d4b7-b565-75d6-3d61113caba0@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:28:38 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8634km5250.wl-maz@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To kwepemm600007.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.208) On 2024/10/23 22:23, Marc Zyngier wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c > index ab597e74ba08e..52f625e07658c 100644 > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c > @@ -3810,8 +3810,18 @@ static int its_vpe_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, > * Check if we're racing against a VPE being destroyed, for > * which we don't want to allow a VMOVP. > */ > - if (!atomic_read(&vpe->vmapp_count)) > - return -EINVAL; > + if (!atomic_read(&vpe->vmapp_count)) { > + if (gic_requires_eager_mapping()) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + /* > + * If we lazily map the VPEs, this isn't an error and > + * we can exit cleanly. > + */ > + cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val); > + irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu)); > + return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE; > + } > > /* > * Changing affinity is mega expensive, so let's be as lazy as Looks good, thanks! Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu