From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 Message-ID: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Sender: linux-alpha-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Manish Jaggi Cc: Yijing Wang , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf , Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Guan Xuetao , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Michael Ellerman , x86@kernel.org, Sebastian Ott , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Matt Turner , Fenghua Yu , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Rusty Russell , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, I On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number Message-Id: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> List-Id: References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:08:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:33756 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S27013979AbbCQOH72SkAh (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:07:59 +0100 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,416,1422921600"; d="scan'208";a="244167523" Message-ID: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number From: Ian Campbell To: Manish Jaggi CC: Yijing Wang , Bjorn Helgaas , , , , , Chris Metcalf , Paul Mackerras , , Guan Xuetao , , Russell King , Michael Ellerman , , Sebastian Ott , Geert Uytterhoeven , , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , , Matt Turner , Fenghua Yu , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Rusty Russell , , Ivan Kokshaysky , Thomas Gleixner , "Yinghai Lu" , Gerald Schaefer , Richard Henderson , Liviu Dudau , Michal Simek , Tony Luck , , Ralf Baechle , "David S. Miller" , , , Jiang Liu Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DLP: MIA2 Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 46432 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ian.campbell@citrix.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:33756 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S27013979AbbCQOH72SkAh (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:07:59 +0100 Message-ID: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number From: Ian Campbell Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: To: Manish Jaggi Cc: Yijing Wang , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf , Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Guan Xuetao , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Michael Ellerman , x86@kernel.org, Sebastian Ott , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Matt Turner , Fenghua Yu , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Rusty Russell , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Ivan Kokshaysky , Thomas Gleixner , Yinghai Lu , Gerald Schaefer , Richard Henderson , Liviu Dudau , Michal Simek , Tony Luck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , "David S. Miller" , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Jiang Liu Message-ID: <20150317140530.VXnNdohX7rFCzIHoGS2NYHfU5cALy13iSLhf2-aWuGw@z> On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from SMTP.CITRIX.COM (smtp.citrix.com [66.165.176.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96D871A020A for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 01:27:32 +1100 (AEDT) Message-ID: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number From: Ian Campbell To: Manish Jaggi Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Yijing Wang , Chris Metcalf , Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Guan Xuetao , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , x86@kernel.org, Sebastian Ott , Geert Uytterhoeven , Gerald Schaefer , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Matt Turner , Fenghua Yu , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Rusty Russell , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Ivan Kokshaysky , Bjorn Helgaas , Thomas Gleixner , Yinghai Lu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Richard Henderson , Liviu Dudau , Michal Simek , Tony Luck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , Jiang Liu , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ian.campbell@citrix.com (Ian Campbell) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Message-ID: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932330AbbCQOH7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:07:59 -0400 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:45067 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753976AbbCQOH4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:07:56 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,416,1422921600"; d="scan'208";a="244167523" Message-ID: <1426601130.18247.238.camel@citrix.com> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 07/30] PCI: Pass PCI domain number combined with root bus number From: Ian Campbell To: Manish Jaggi CC: Yijing Wang , Bjorn Helgaas , , , , , Chris Metcalf , Paul Mackerras , , Guan Xuetao , , Russell King , Michael Ellerman , , Sebastian Ott , Geert Uytterhoeven , , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , , Matt Turner , Fenghua Yu , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Rusty Russell , , Ivan Kokshaysky , Thomas Gleixner , "Yinghai Lu" , Gerald Schaefer , Richard Henderson , Liviu Dudau , Michal Simek , Tony Luck , , Ralf Baechle , "David S. Miller" , , , Jiang Liu Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:05:30 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> References: <1425868467-9667-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <1425868467-9667-8-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <5507B88D.1020300@caviumnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DLP: MIA2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 10:45 +0530, Manish Jaggi wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2015 08:04 AM, Yijing Wang wrote: > > Now we could pass PCI domain combined with bus number > > in u32 argu. Because in arm/arm64, PCI domain number > > is assigned by pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). So we leave > > pci_scan_root_bus() and pci_create_root_bus() in arm/arm64 > > unchanged. A new function pci_host_assign_domain_nr() > > will be introduced for arm/arm64 to assign domain number > > in later patch. > Hi, > I think these changes might not be required. We have made very few > changes in the xen-pcifront to support PCI passthrough in arm64. > As per xen architecture for a domU only a single pci virtual bus is > created and all passthrough devices are attached to it. I guess you are only talking about the changes to xen-pcifront.c? Otherwise you are ignoring the dom0 case which is exposed to the real set of PCI root complexes and anyway I'm not sure how "not needed for Xen domU" translates into not required, since it is clearly required for other systems. Strictly speaking the Xen pciif protocol does support multiple buses, it's just that the tools, and perhaps kernels, have not yet felt any need to actually make use of that. There doesn't seem to be any harm in updating pcifront to follow this generic API change. Ian.