From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Tom Lyon <pugs@cisco.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] KVM&genirq: Enable adaptive IRQ sharing for passed-through devices
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 11:37:25 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1012041052450.2653@localhost6.localdomain6> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1291419444.git.jan.kiszka@web.de>
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Besides 3 cleanup patches, this series consists of two major changes.
> The first introduces an interrupt sharing notifier to the genirq
> subsystem. It fires when an interrupt line is about to be use by more
> than one driver or the last but one user called free_irq.
>
> The second major change makes use of this interface in KVM's PCI pass-
> through subsystem. KVM has to keep the interrupt source disabled while
> calling into the guest to handle the event. This can be done at device
> or line level. The former is required to share the interrupt line, the
> latter is an order of magnitude faster (see patch 3 for details).
>
> Beside pass-through support of KVM, further users of the IRQ notifier
> could become VFIO (not yet mainline) and uio_pci_generic which have to
> resolve the same conflict.
Hmm. You basically want to have the following functionality:
If interrupt is shared, then you want to keep the current behaviour:
disable at line level (IRQF_ONESHOT)
run handler thread (PCI level masking)
reenable at line level in irq_finalize_oneshot()
reenable at PCI level when guest is done
If interrupt is not shared:
disable at line level (IRQF_ONESHOT)
run handler thread (no PCI level masking)
no reenable at line level
reenable at line level when guest is done
I think the whole notifier approach including the extra irq handlers
plus the requirement to call disable_irq_nosync() from the non shared
handler is overkill. We can be more clever.
The genirq code knows whether you have one or more handler
registered. So we can add IRQF_ONESHOT_UNMASK_SHARED and add a status
field to irq_data (which I was going to do anyway for other
reasons). In that status field you get a bit which says IRQ_MASK_DEVICE.
So with IRQF_ONESHOT_UNMASK_SHARED == 0 we keep the current behaviour.
If IRQF_ONESHOT_UNMASK_SHARED== 1 and IRQ_MASK_DEVICE == 1 we keep the
current behaviour.
If IRQF_ONESHOT_UNMASK_SHARED== 1 and IRQ_MASK_DEVICE == 0 then then
irq_finalize_oneshot() simply marks the interrupt disabled (equivalent
to disable_irq_nosync()) and returns.
Now in your primary irq handler you simply check the IRQ_MASK_DEVICE
status flag and decide whether you need to mask at PCI level or not.
Your threaded handler gets the same information via IRQ_MASK_DEVICE so
it can issue the appropriate user space notification depending on that
flag.
This works fully transparent across adding and removing handlers. On
request_irq/free_irq we update the IRQ_MASK_DEVICE flag with the
following logic:
nr_actions IRQF_ONESHOT_UNMASK_SHARED IRQ_MASK_DEVICE
1 0 1
1 1 0
>1 don't care 1
If interrupts are in flight accross request/free then this change
takes effect when the next interrupt comes in.
No notifiers, no disable_irq_nosync() magic, less and simpler code.
Thoughts ?
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-04 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-03 23:37 Jan Kiszka
2010-12-03 23:37 ` [PATCH 1/5] genirq: Pass descriptor to __free_irq Jan Kiszka
2010-12-03 23:37 ` [PATCH 2/5] genirq: Introduce interrupt sharing notifier Jan Kiszka
2010-12-03 23:37 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: Split up MSI-X assigned device IRQ handler Jan Kiszka
2010-12-03 23:37 ` [PATCH 4/5] KVM: Clean up unneeded void pointer casts Jan Kiszka
2010-12-03 23:37 ` [PATCH 5/5] KVM: Allow host IRQ sharing for passed-through PCI 2.3 devices Jan Kiszka
2010-12-06 16:21 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-06 16:34 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-12-06 16:40 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-06 16:46 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-12-06 17:01 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-06 17:11 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-12-04 10:37 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2010-12-04 11:34 ` [PATCH 0/5] KVM&genirq: Enable adaptive IRQ sharing for passed-through devices Jan Kiszka
2010-12-04 14:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-12-04 14:54 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-12-04 16:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.00.1012041052450.2653@localhost6.localdomain6 \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pugs@cisco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®