| Message ID | 1402779067-34478-4-git-send-email-christoffer.dall@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 2014-06-14 21:51, Christoffer Dall wrote: > If we unqueue a level-triggered interrupt completely, and the LR does > not stick around in the active state (and will therefore no longer > generate a maintenance interrupt), then we should clear the queued > flag > so that the vgic can actually queue this level-triggered interrupt at > a > later time and deal with its pending state then. > > Note: This should actually be properly fixed to handle the active > state > on the distributor. > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> With the previous remark about queued/resample in mind, Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> M.
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c index 00e6bdd..87c977c 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c @@ -660,8 +660,10 @@ static void vgic_unqueue_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) * active), then the LR does not hold any useful info and can * be marked as free for other use. */ - if (!(*lr & GICH_LR_STATE)) + if (!(*lr & GICH_LR_STATE)) { vgic_retire_lr(i, irq, vgic_cpu); + vgic_irq_clear_queued(vcpu, irq); + } /* Finally update the VGIC state. */ vgic_update_state(vcpu->kvm);
If we unqueue a level-triggered interrupt completely, and the LR does not stick around in the active state (and will therefore no longer generate a maintenance interrupt), then we should clear the queued flag so that the vgic can actually queue this level-triggered interrupt at a later time and deal with its pending state then. Note: This should actually be properly fixed to handle the active state on the distributor. Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> --- virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)