[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: Do not route NS phys timer IRQ to Xen
Hi Michal, On 28/10/2022 08:56, Michal Orzel wrote: At the moment, we route NS phys timer IRQ to Xen even though it does not make use of this timer. Xen uses hypervisor timer for itself and the physical timer is fully emulated, hence there is nothing that can trigger such IRQ. This means that requesting/releasing IRQ ends up as a deadcode as it has no impact on the functional behavior, whereas the code within a handler ends up being unreachable. This is a left over from the early days when the CNTHP IRQ was buggy on the HW model used for testing and we had to use the CNTP instead. Remove the calls to {request/release}_irq for this timer as well as the code within the handler. Since timer_interrupt handler is now only used by the CNTHP, remove the IRQ affiliation condition. Keep the calls to zero the CNTP_CTL_EL0 register on timer init/deinit for sanity and also remove the corresponding perf counter definition. Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx> --- Based on the outcome of the following discussion: https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/d55938a3-aaca-1d01-b34f-858dbca9830b@xxxxxxx/ --- xen/arch/arm/include/asm/perfc_defn.h | 1 - xen/arch/arm/time.c | 16 +--------------- 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/perfc_defn.h b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/perfc_defn.h index 31f071222b24..3ab0391175d7 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/perfc_defn.h +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/perfc_defn.h @@ -70,7 +70,6 @@ PERFCOUNTER(spis, "#SPIs") PERFCOUNTER(guest_irqs, "#GUEST-IRQS")PERFCOUNTER(hyp_timer_irqs, "Hypervisor timer interrupts")-PERFCOUNTER(phys_timer_irqs, "Physical timer interrupts") PERFCOUNTER(virt_timer_irqs, "Virtual timer interrupts") PERFCOUNTER(maintenance_irqs, "Maintenance interrupts")diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/time.c b/xen/arch/arm/time.cindex dec53b5f7d53..3160fcc7b440 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/time.c +++ b/xen/arch/arm/time.c @@ -222,8 +222,7 @@ int reprogram_timer(s_time_t timeout) /* Handle the firing timer */ static void timer_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id, struct cpu_user_regs *regs) { - if ( irq == (timer_irq[TIMER_HYP_PPI]) && - READ_SYSREG(CNTHP_CTL_EL2) & CNTx_CTL_PENDING ) + if ( READ_SYSREG(CNTHP_CTL_EL2) & CNTx_CTL_PENDING ) AFAICT, this condition is meant to be true most of the times. So as you are modifying the code, could you take the opportunity to add a "likely()"? Or better invert the condition so the code below is not indented. Cheers, -- Julien Grall
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |