mirror of
https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2026-06-04 12:35:52 +02:00
KVM: arm64: Add LR overflow handling documentation
Add a bit of documentation describing how we are dealing with LR overflow. This is mostly a braindump of how things are expected to work. For now anyway. Tested-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> Tested-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> Link: https://msgid.link/20251120172540.2267180-10-maz@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
879a7fd4fd
commit
0dc433e79a
|
|
@ -825,7 +825,86 @@ static int compute_ap_list_depth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
|
|||
return count;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* Requires the VCPU's ap_list_lock to be held. */
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Dealing with LR overflow is close to black magic -- dress accordingly.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* We have to present an almost infinite number of interrupts through a very
|
||||
* limited number of registers. Therefore crucial decisions must be made to
|
||||
* ensure we feed the most relevant interrupts into the LRs, and yet have
|
||||
* some facilities to let the guest interact with those that are not there.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* All considerations below are in the context of interrupts targeting a
|
||||
* single vcpu with non-idle state (either pending, active, or both),
|
||||
* colloquially called the ap_list:
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - Pending interrupts must have priority over active interrupts. This also
|
||||
* excludes pending+active interrupts. This ensures that a guest can
|
||||
* perform priority drops on any number of interrupts, and yet be
|
||||
* presented the next pending one.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - Deactivation of interrupts outside of the LRs must be tracked by using
|
||||
* either the EOIcount-driven maintenance interrupt, and sometimes by
|
||||
* trapping the DIR register.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - For EOImode=0, a non-zero EOIcount means walking the ap_list past the
|
||||
* point that made it into the LRs, and deactivate interrupts that would
|
||||
* have made it onto the LRs if we had the space.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - The MI-generation bits must be used to try and force an exit when the
|
||||
* guest has done enough changes to the LRs that we want to reevaluate the
|
||||
* situation:
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - if the total number of pending interrupts exceeds the number of
|
||||
* LR, NPIE must be set in order to exit once no pending interrupts
|
||||
* are present in the LRs, allowing us to populate the next batch.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - if there are active interrupts outside of the LRs, then LRENPIE
|
||||
* must be set so that we exit on deactivation of one of these, and
|
||||
* work out which one is to be deactivated. Note that this is not
|
||||
* enough to deal with EOImode=1, see below.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - if the overall number of interrupts exceeds the number of LRs,
|
||||
* then UIE must be set to allow refilling of the LRs once the
|
||||
* majority of them has been processed.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - as usual, MI triggers are only an optimisation, since we cannot
|
||||
* rely on the MI being delivered in timely manner...
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - EOImode=1 creates some additional problems:
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - deactivation can happen in any order, and we cannot rely on
|
||||
* EOImode=0's coupling of priority-drop and deactivation which
|
||||
* imposes strict reverse Ack order. This means that DIR must
|
||||
* trap if we have active interrupts outside of the LRs.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - deactivation of SPIs can occur on any CPU, while the SPI is only
|
||||
* present in the ap_list of the CPU that actually ack-ed it. In that
|
||||
* case, EOIcount doesn't provide enough information, and we must
|
||||
* resort to trapping DIR even if we don't overflow the LRs. Bonus
|
||||
* point for not trapping DIR when no SPIs are pending or active in
|
||||
* the whole VM.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - LPIs do not suffer the same problem as SPIs on deactivation, as we
|
||||
* have to essentially discard the active state, see below.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - Virtual LPIs have an active state (surprise!), which gets removed on
|
||||
* priority drop (EOI). However, EOIcount doesn't get bumped when the LPI
|
||||
* is not present in the LR (surprise again!). Special care must therefore
|
||||
* be taken to remove the active state from any activated LPI when exiting
|
||||
* from the guest. This is in a way no different from what happens on the
|
||||
* physical side. We still rely on the running priority to have been
|
||||
* removed from the APRs, irrespective of the LPI being present in the LRs
|
||||
* or not.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - Virtual SGIs directly injected via GICv4.1 must not affect EOIcount, as
|
||||
* they are not managed in SW and don't have a true active state. So only
|
||||
* set vSGIEOICount when no SGIs are in the ap_list.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - GICv2 SGIs with multiple sources are injected one source at a time, as
|
||||
* if they were made pending sequentially. This may mean that we don't
|
||||
* always present the HPPI if other interrupts with lower priority are
|
||||
* pending in the LRs. Big deal.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static void vgic_flush_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user