All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: kevin@koconnor.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] Use the correct mask to size the PCI option ROM BAR.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:20:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091012132025.GA13022@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091012120857.GI16702@redhat.com>

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 02:08:57PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:59:16PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:48:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:03:36PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:08:21PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:52:25AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 08:50:24AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > > > > Send patch with your favorite interpretation to qemu pcbios/seabios.
> > > > > > > The regression concern from my previous mail applicable here as well.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Okay. Can you ack the following?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > I can if you'll add PCI spec reference for me to double check.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Also I prefer strict spec reading :)
> > > > 
> > > > OK, the issue is that reserved bits in BARs are not
> > > > defined as read-only.  So here's a strict one:
> > > > can you ack?
> > > > 
> > > > --->
> > > > 
> > > > seabios: fix ROM and I/O sizing
> > > > 
> > > > For ROM BARs, bit 0 is writeable (enable bit), which we not
> > > > only don't want to set, but it will stick and make us think
> > > > it's an I/O port resource.
> > > > Further, PCI spec defines the following bits as reserved:
> > > > - bit 1 in I/O BAR
> > > > - bits 10:1 in ROM BAR
> > > > and we should be careful and write 0 there.
> > > > For memory, bits 0-3 are reserved, so it's safe to handle it
> > > > in the same way as I/O.
> > > > 
> > > > See 6.2.5.1 for I/O and memory, and 6.2.5.2 for ROM;
> > > > pages 225 and 228 in PCI spec revision 3.0.
> > > > 
> > > Section 6.2.5.1 says:
> > > Software saves the original value of the Base Address register, writes
> > > 0 FFFF FFFFh to the register, then reads it back.
> > 
> > I think you miss something.  Here it is in full:
> > 
> > 	Decode (I/O or memory) of a register is disabled via the command register before sizing a
> > 	Base Address register. Software saves the original value of the Base Address register, writes
> > 	0 FFFF FFFFh to the register, then reads it back. Size calculation can be done from the
> > 	32-bit value read by first clearing encoding information bits (bit 0 for I/O, bits 0-3 for
> > 	memory), inverting all 32 bits (logical NOT), then incrementing by 1. The resultant 32-bit
> > 	value is the memory/I/O range size decoded by the register. Note that the upper 16 bits of
> > 	the result is ignored if the Base Address register is for I/O and bits 16-31 returned zero
> > 	upon read. The original value in the Base Address register is restored before re-enabling
> > 	decode in the command register of the device.
> > 
> > Note the bit about restoring back the original value.
> > You can not assume that reserved bits are read-only.
> > 
> I assume nothing. I am saying the code was correct in writing 0xffffffff
> there. If coded does not restore original value that is another issue.


Right. And there's another bug that I see and that is that size for I/O
BAR was calculated incorrectly: val & ~0xf is wrong for I/O as the size
could be 4 bytes.  So here's a patch that addresses all 3 issues:
Ack?

---->

Subject: [PATCH] seabios: fix low bits in ROM and I/O sizing

This cleans up handling of low bits during BAR sizing,
to match PCI spec requirements, and to use symbolic
constants from pci_regs.h

Issues fixed:
For ROM BARs, bit 0 is writeable (enable bit), which we not
only don't want to set, but it will stick and make us think
it's an I/O port resource.
Further, PCI spec defines the following bits as reserved:
- bit 1 in I/O BAR
- bits 10:1 in ROM BAR
and we should be careful and preserve any values there.
Bits 3:2 in I/O BAR might be writeable, so it
is wrong to mask them when calculating BAR size.

Spec references:
See 6.2.5.1 for I/O and memory, and 6.2.5.2 for ROM,
6.1 for reserved bit handling;
pages 225, 228 and 214 in PCI spec revision 3.0.

See also Qemu pcbios commit 6ddb9f5c742b2b82b1755d7ec2a127f6e20e3806

Original-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>

diff --git a/src/pciinit.c b/src/pciinit.c
index 7d2ea00..f9ebd61 100644
--- a/src/pciinit.c
+++ b/src/pciinit.c
@@ -136,16 +136,23 @@ static void pci_bios_init_device(u16 bdf)
         /* default memory mappings */
         for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_REGIONS; i++) {
             int ofs;
-            u32 val, size;
-
+            u32 val, mask, size;
             if (i == PCI_ROM_SLOT)
                 ofs = PCI_ROM_ADDRESS;
             else
                 ofs = PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_0 + i * 4;
-            pci_config_writel(bdf, ofs, 0xffffffff);
+
+            val = pci_config_readl(bdf, ofs);
+            if (i == PCI_ROM_SLOT)
+		mask = PCI_ROM_ADDRESS_MASK;
+            else if (val & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO)
+                mask = PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_IO_MASK;
+            else
+                mask = PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK;
+            pci_config_writel(bdf, ofs, val | mask);
             val = pci_config_readl(bdf, ofs);
             if (val != 0) {
-                size = (~(val & ~0xf)) + 1;
+                size = (~(val & mask)) + 1;
                 if (val & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO)
                     paddr = &pci_bios_io_addr;
                 else if (size >= 0x04000000)
-- 
1.6.5.rc2

  reply	other threads:[~2009-10-12 13:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-10-11 18:59 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/5] Generate mptable unconditionally Gleb Natapov
2009-10-11 18:59 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/5] Enable power button event generation Gleb Natapov
2009-10-11 18:59 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] Use the correct mask to size the PCI option ROM BAR Gleb Natapov
2009-10-11 21:53   ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12  6:50     ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12  9:52       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 10:08         ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 11:03           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 11:45             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 11:48             ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 11:59               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 12:08                 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 13:20                   ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2009-10-12 13:29                     ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 13:51                       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 14:04                         ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 14:11                           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 14:17                             ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 14:24                               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 14:20                     ` [Qemu-devel] seabios: fix low bits in ROM and I/O sizing Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-13 13:39                       ` [Qemu-devel] " Gleb Natapov
2009-10-14 23:29                         ` Kevin O'Connor
2009-10-11 18:59 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] Make MMIO address page aligned in guest Gleb Natapov
2009-10-11 21:48   ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12  6:44     ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12  7:10       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12  7:22         ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12  8:13           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12  8:48             ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12  9:43               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-10-12 10:06                 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 14:27   ` Kevin O'Connor
2009-10-11 18:59 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] Set the PCI base address to 0xf0000000 Gleb Natapov
2009-10-12 14:24   ` [Qemu-devel] " Kevin O'Connor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20091012132025.GA13022@redhat.com \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=kevin@koconnor.net \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.