lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Aug]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 05/10] VFIO: platform: add vfio_platform_is_active
From
Date
On Mon, 2015-08-10 at 15:20 +0200, Eric Auger wrote:
> This function returns whether the IRQ is active at irqchip level or
> VFIO masked. If either is true, it is considered the IRQ is active.
> Currently there is no way to differentiate userspace masked IRQ from
> automasked IRQ. There might be false detection of activity. However
> it is currently acceptable to have false detection.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@linaro.org>
>
> ---
> ---
> drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
> index a285384..efaee58 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_platform_irq.c
> @@ -205,6 +205,23 @@ static int vfio_platform_set_automasked(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int vfio_platform_is_active(struct vfio_platform_irq *irq)

vfio_platform_irq_is_active()?

> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + bool active, masked, outstanding;
> + int ret;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->lock, flags);
> +
> + ret = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->hwirq, IRQCHIP_STATE_ACTIVE, &active);
> + BUG_ON(ret);

Why can't we propagate this error to the caller and let them decide?

> + masked = irq->masked;
> + outstanding = active || masked;
> +
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->lock, flags);
> + return outstanding;
> +}
> +
> static void vfio_platform_irq_bypass_stop(struct irq_bypass_producer *prod)
> {
> }





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-08-12 21:21    [W:0.217 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site