qemu-rust
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rust: add bindings for interrupt sources


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rust: add bindings for interrupt sources
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 12:07:27 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 22/11/24 11:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 11/22/24 11:30, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 22/11/24 09:32, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
+/// Interrupt sources are used by devices to pass changes to a boolean value to +/// other devices (typically interrupt or GPIO controllers).  QEMU interrupt
+/// sources are always active-high.

So 'always active-high' = true below? (Wondering about pulsation, if the
true -> false transition is always correct).

Yeah, I mean that raise uses true (or 1 :)) and lower uses false.
an example?

I was thinking of an active-low line where you want to pulse 1 -> 0.
Just chiming in, not to worry about.

This is not happening at the device level, so I assume that such a line would not use raise/lower.  Rather, the board (which is on the interrupt sink side) would install a qemu_irq_invert() between the device and the interrupt controller or GPIO controller.

Is this deliberate to restrict the Rust binding to boolean? (Maybe you
envision a VectoredInterruptSource implementation for that).

No, I simply wasn't aware of that.  I'll adjust; do you have
an example?

I am having hard time to find one, in particular because I
removed one in c264c074d8 ("hw/intc: Remove TYPE_ETRAX_FS_PIC device"):

Ok, then we could put the type as a generic parameter, and use that parameter in InterruptSource::set().

pub struct InterruptSource<T = bool> where u32: From<T> {
     inner: BqlCell<*mut IrqState>,

     // this is only needed top ensure that T appears somehow in the
     // struct.  Random Rust type theory stuff. :)
     _marker: PhantomData<fn(&Self, T)>,
}

...

/// Send `level` to the interrupt sink.
pub fn set(&self, level: T) {
     let ptr = self.0.get();
     // SAFETY: the pointer is retrieved under the BQL and remains valid
    // until the BQL is released, which is after qemu_set_irq() is entered.
     unsafe {
         qemu_set_irq(ptr, level.into());
     }
}

and then only implement raise/lower/pulse for InterruptSource<bool>.

This is backwards compatible so we can do it either now, or later when needs arises.  You tell me. :)

If there are no more vector uses, personally I'd convert qemu_set_irq()
to use an explicit boolean level. If vector need arises then I'd
add it using a new explicit method, i.e. qemu_set_irq_vector(); so
the arguments are obvious when we review qemu_set_irq*() uses.

Otherwise I'll defer to Peter who raised that point first.


Paolo

See Peter's comment in https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/ CAFEAcA9cObnb11cSS_StbSHdP0aB6sDeqSHfjb3-qRBfy7K9Kw@mail.gmail.com/

+/// Interrupt sources can only be triggered under the Big QEMU Lock; they are
+/// neither `Send` nor `Sync`.

Oops, this is incorrect.  BqlCell *is* Send/Sync, but checks the
BQL state at run-time.

Paolo









reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]