[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 09/14] xen: events: push setup of irq<->{evtchn,ipi,virq,pirq} maps into irq_info init functions
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 05:41:21PM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > Encapsulate setup of XXX_to_irq array in the relevant > xen_irq_info_*_init function. > > Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/xen/events.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c > index 72725fa..cf372d4 100644 > --- a/drivers/xen/events.c > +++ b/drivers/xen/events.c > @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ static struct irq_info *info_for_irq(unsigned irq) > > /* Constructors for packed IRQ information. */ > static void xen_irq_info_common_init(struct irq_info *info, > + unsigned irq, > enum xen_irq_type type, > unsigned short evtchn, > unsigned short cpu) > @@ -136,6 +137,8 @@ static void xen_irq_info_common_init(struct irq_info > *info, > info->type = type; > info->evtchn = evtchn; > info->cpu = cpu; > + > + evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; Is there any case where this would lead to an over-write? Should we have an WARN_ON(evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] != -1) just to check? > } > > static void xen_irq_info_evtchn_init(unsigned irq, > @@ -143,29 +146,35 @@ static void xen_irq_info_evtchn_init(unsigned irq, > { > struct irq_info *info = info_for_irq(irq); > > - xen_irq_info_common_init(info, IRQT_EVTCHN, evtchn, 0); > + xen_irq_info_common_init(info, irq, IRQT_EVTCHN, evtchn, 0); > } > > -static void xen_irq_info_ipi_init(unsigned irq, > +static void xen_irq_info_ipi_init(unsigned cpu, > + unsigned irq, > unsigned short evtchn, > enum ipi_vector ipi) > { > struct irq_info *info = info_for_irq(irq); > > - xen_irq_info_common_init(info, IRQT_IPI, evtchn, 0); > + xen_irq_info_common_init(info, irq, IRQT_IPI, evtchn, 0); > > info->u.ipi = ipi; > + > + per_cpu(ipi_to_irq, cpu)[ipi] = irq; Ditto. Should we do a check first to see if we are overwritting anything but the default value of -1? > } > > -static void xen_irq_info_virq_init(unsigned irq, > +static void xen_irq_info_virq_init(unsigned cpu, > + unsigned irq, > unsigned short evtchn, > unsigned short virq) > { > struct irq_info *info = info_for_irq(irq); > > - xen_irq_info_common_init(info, IRQT_VIRQ, evtchn, 0); > + xen_irq_info_common_init(info, irq, IRQT_VIRQ, evtchn, 0); > > info->u.virq = virq; > + > + per_cpu(virq_to_irq, cpu)[virq] = irq; > } > > static void xen_irq_info_pirq_init(unsigned irq, > @@ -177,12 +186,14 @@ static void xen_irq_info_pirq_init(unsigned irq, > { > struct irq_info *info = info_for_irq(irq); > > - xen_irq_info_common_init(info, IRQT_PIRQ, evtchn, 0); > + xen_irq_info_common_init(info, irq, IRQT_PIRQ, evtchn, 0); > > info->u.pirq.pirq = pirq; > info->u.pirq.gsi = gsi; > info->u.pirq.vector = vector; > info->u.pirq.flags = flags; > + > + pirq_to_irq[pirq] = irq; > } > > /* > @@ -644,7 +655,6 @@ int xen_bind_pirq_gsi_to_irq(unsigned gsi, > > xen_irq_info_pirq_init(irq, 0, pirq, gsi, irq_op.vector, > shareable ? PIRQ_SHAREABLE : 0); > - pirq_to_irq[pirq] = irq; > > out: > spin_unlock(&irq_mapping_update_lock); > @@ -682,7 +692,6 @@ int xen_bind_pirq_msi_to_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, struct > msi_desc *msidesc, > handle_level_irq, name); > > xen_irq_info_pirq_init(irq, 0, pirq, 0, vector, 0); > - pirq_to_irq[pirq] = irq; > ret = set_irq_msi(irq, msidesc); > if (ret < 0) > goto error_irq; > @@ -746,7 +755,6 @@ int bind_evtchn_to_irq(unsigned int evtchn) > set_irq_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &xen_dynamic_chip, > handle_fasteoi_irq, "event"); > > - evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; > xen_irq_info_evtchn_init(irq, evtchn); > } > > @@ -779,9 +787,7 @@ static int bind_ipi_to_irq(unsigned int ipi, unsigned int > cpu) > BUG(); > evtchn = bind_ipi.port; > > - evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; > - xen_irq_info_ipi_init(irq, evtchn, ipi); > - per_cpu(ipi_to_irq, cpu)[ipi] = irq; > + xen_irq_info_ipi_init(cpu, irq, evtchn, ipi); > > bind_evtchn_to_cpu(evtchn, cpu); > } > @@ -814,10 +820,7 @@ int bind_virq_to_irq(unsigned int virq, unsigned int cpu) > BUG(); > evtchn = bind_virq.port; > > - evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; > - xen_irq_info_virq_init(irq, evtchn, virq); > - > - per_cpu(virq_to_irq, cpu)[virq] = irq; > + xen_irq_info_virq_init(cpu, irq, evtchn, virq); > > bind_evtchn_to_cpu(evtchn, cpu); > } > @@ -1120,7 +1123,6 @@ void rebind_evtchn_irq(int evtchn, int irq) > so there should be a proper type */ > BUG_ON(info->type == IRQT_UNBOUND); > > - evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; > xen_irq_info_evtchn_init(irq, evtchn); > > spin_unlock(&irq_mapping_update_lock); > @@ -1288,8 +1290,7 @@ static void restore_cpu_virqs(unsigned int cpu) > evtchn = bind_virq.port; > > /* Record the new mapping. */ > - evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; > - xen_irq_info_virq_init(irq, evtchn, virq); > + xen_irq_info_virq_init(cpu, irq, evtchn, virq); > bind_evtchn_to_cpu(evtchn, cpu); > } > } > @@ -1313,8 +1314,7 @@ static void restore_cpu_ipis(unsigned int cpu) > evtchn = bind_ipi.port; > > /* Record the new mapping. */ > - evtchn_to_irq[evtchn] = irq; > - xen_irq_info_ipi_init(irq, evtchn, ipi); > + xen_irq_info_ipi_init(cpu, irq, evtchn, ipi); > bind_evtchn_to_cpu(evtchn, cpu); > } > } > -- > 1.5.6.5 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |