Skip to content

multikernel: preserve CPU-zero fallback for legacy host doorbells - #42

Draft
pro-utkarshM wants to merge 1 commit into
multikernel:masterfrom
pro-utkarshM:mk/host-ipi-fallback-submit-v25
Draft

pro-utkarshM wants to merge 1 commit into
multikernel:masterfrom
pro-utkarshM:mk/host-ipi-fallback-submit-v25

Conversation

@pro-utkarshM

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

Split the compatibility fix out of PR #39 as requested in
the review instructions.
Base: 40368e0702bb2c56932e9d91e617a33d76f1c267.
Single commit: a44342266ff991c460f18cd4343af581ff1ca22d.

mk_restore_host_instance() currently rejects an otherwise valid host ring
when the optional multikernel,host-ipi-cpu property is absent. Initialize the
target to physical CPU 0 and then read the optional property, preserving the
legacy target while honoring an explicit 64-bit target. The emitter already
exists upstream; this patch changes restore behavior, not the SBI doorbell.

Validation and scope

The extracted production restore fixture was rerun at this exact source tip:
11 checks, 0 failures. It covers the legacy fallback, explicit target and
allocation/mapping/publication failure paths.

bash tools/testing/selftests/multikernel/host_target_test.sh

Evidence package.
Cumulative checkpatch: 0 errors, 2 warnings and 6 checks; not a clean-lint claim.
These are host-side function checks, not physical sparse-hart or live legacy
host/new-spawn interoperability qualification. SBI IPI implementation remains
with #28, and no general mixed-version ACK compatibility is implied.

The host-ipi-cpu emitter is already upstream. An absent optional target must not discard a valid host ring; preserve the legacy physical CPU zero behavior while honoring explicit sparse 64-bit targets.

The extracted production restore test first failed its two legacy-host assertions and now passes all 11 checks, including allocation, mapping and publication errors. No broader mixed-peer ACK compatibility is claimed.

Signed-off-by: Utkarsh Maurya <projects.utkarshMaurya@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant