Re: [PATCH v5 03/49] irqchip/gic-v5: Set up gic_kvm_info on ACPI hosts
Lorenzo Pieralisi <[email protected]> Fri, 7 Aug 2026 15:44:30 +0200
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.kvmarm,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.kvm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <anXhPp9QUH_rOn2X@red-moon> |
On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 11:14:07AM +0000, Sascha Bischoff wrote: > Device-tree based GICv5 probing already passes the IRS details and > maintenance interrupt to KVM, but the ACPI path only initialises the > irqchip and installs the ACPI IRQ model. As a result, KVM never sees > the GICv5 host information required to probe the vGIC on ACPI systems. > > Add the ACPI equivalent of the DT KVM setup. Parse the MADT GICC > entries for the maintenance interrupt, retaining the value from the > first relevant entry and warning if later entries disagree. Warn if > firmware describes the interrupt as edge-triggered, but register it as > a level-sensitive, active-high GSI. Pass the resulting IRQ together > with the IRS base and coherency information to KVM. > > Native GICv5 does not require a maintenance interrupt unless the > legacy GICv3-compatible CPU interface is present, so preserve the > existing no-maintenance-IRQ handling for that case. > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Bischoff <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v5.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Just a bunch of nits below. > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v5.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v5.c > index e7a7aedcfaf78..5b8ea8551d832 100644 > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v5.c > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v5.c > @@ -1126,7 +1126,7 @@ static void gicv5_set_cpuif_idbits(void) > #ifdef CONFIG_KVM > static struct gic_kvm_info gic_v5_kvm_info __initdata; > > -static void __init gic_of_setup_kvm_info(struct device_node *node) > +static void __init gic_setup_kvm_info(unsigned int maint_irq) > { > struct gicv5_irs_chip_data *irs_data = gicv5_irs_get_chip_data(); > > @@ -1137,17 +1137,19 @@ static void __init gic_of_setup_kvm_info(struct device_node *node) > */ > if (!gicv5_global_data.virt_capable) { > pr_info("GIC implementation is not virtualization capable\n"); > - return; > + goto out_dispose_maint_irq; Isn't it cleaner to dispose the mapping in the caller (by returning an error value) rather than here ? I appreciate this keeps the IRQ mapping disposal in one place but it decouples the allocation from the failure path. > } > > - gic_v5_kvm_info.type = GIC_V5; > + if (WARN_ON(!irs_data)) > + goto out_dispose_maint_irq; > > + gic_v5_kvm_info.type = GIC_V5; > gic_v5_kvm_info.gicv5_irs.base = irs_data->irs_base; > gic_v5_kvm_info.gicv5_irs.non_coherent = !!(irs_data->flags & IRS_FLAGS_NON_COHERENT); > > /* GIC Virtual CPU interface maintenance interrupt */ > gic_v5_kvm_info.no_maint_irq_mask = false; > - gic_v5_kvm_info.maint_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(node, 0); > + gic_v5_kvm_info.maint_irq = maint_irq; > > /* > * We require an MI if we have legacy support, but don't, otherwise. > @@ -1162,11 +1164,95 @@ static void __init gic_of_setup_kvm_info(struct device_node *node) > gic_v5_kvm_info.no_maint_irq_mask = true; > > vgic_set_kvm_info(&gic_v5_kvm_info); > + return; > + > +out_dispose_maint_irq: > + irq_dispose_mapping(maint_irq); > +} > + > +static void __init gic_of_setup_kvm_info(struct device_node *node) > +{ > + /* GIC Virtual CPU interface maintenance interrupt */ > + gic_setup_kvm_info(irq_of_parse_and_map(node, 0)); > +} > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > +struct gicv5_acpi_kvm_info { > + u32 maint_irq; > +}; > + > +static struct gicv5_acpi_kvm_info acpi_v5_kvm_info __initdata; > + > +static int __init gic_acpi_parse_virt_madt_gicc(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, > + const unsigned long end) > +{ > + struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *gicc = > + (struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *)header; > + static int first_madt = true; > + > + if (!(gicc->flags & > + (ACPI_MADT_ENABLED | ACPI_MADT_GICC_ONLINE_CAPABLE))) > + return 0; This would count as a valid parsed entry even though you don't retrieve the maintanance interrupt number, more below. > + > + if (gicc->flags & ACPI_MADT_VGIC_IRQ_MODE) > + pr_warn_once(FW_BUG "MI wrongly advertised as Edge-triggered\n"); > + > + if (first_madt) { > + first_madt = false; > + > + acpi_v5_kvm_info.maint_irq = gicc->vgic_interrupt; > + return 0; > + } > + > + if (acpi_v5_kvm_info.maint_irq != gicc->vgic_interrupt) > + pr_warn_once(FW_BUG "MI not the same on all CPUs\n"); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static bool __init gic_acpi_collect_virt_info(void) > +{ > + int count; > + > + count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_GENERIC_INTERRUPT, > + gic_acpi_parse_virt_madt_gicc, 0); > + > + return count > 0; > } > + > +static void __init gic_acpi_setup_kvm_info(void) > +{ > + unsigned int maint_irq = 0; > + int irq; > + > + if (!gic_acpi_collect_virt_info()) { > + pr_warn("Unable to get hardware information used for virtualization\n"); > + return; > + } Nit: gic_acpi_collect_virt_info() might return true and you still don't get the info you need. Now, at least one GICC entry should be enabled and online capable (we are booting on a core after all but never overestimate ACPI tables :)) so this is theory but I thought I would mention it. > + > + if (acpi_v5_kvm_info.maint_irq) { > + irq = acpi_register_gsi(NULL, acpi_v5_kvm_info.maint_irq, > + ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, > + ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH); > + if (irq > 0) > + maint_irq = irq; > + else > + pr_warn("Failed to register GSI for GICv5 maintenance IRQ\n"); Another nit: do we really need the maint_irq variable ? Thanks, Lorenzo > + } > + > + gic_setup_kvm_info(maint_irq); > +} > +#endif // CONFIG_ACPI > #else > static inline void __init gic_of_setup_kvm_info(struct device_node *node) > { > } > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > +static inline void __init gic_acpi_setup_kvm_info(void) > +{ > +} > +#endif > #endif // CONFIG_KVM > > static int __init gicv5_init_common(struct fwnode_handle *parent_domain) > @@ -1265,6 +1351,7 @@ static int __init gic_acpi_init(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, const unsig > goto out_irs; > > acpi_set_irq_model(ACPI_IRQ_MODEL_GIC_V5, gic_v5_get_gsi_domain_id); > + gic_acpi_setup_kvm_info(); > > return 0; > > -- > 2.34.1