From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: "Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
"Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
"Marc-André Lureau" <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>,
"Stefan Weil" <sw@weilnetz.de>,
"Yonggang Luo" <luoyonggang@gmail.com>,
"Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
"Jason Wang" <jasowang@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] hw/i386/intel_iommu: Fix VTD_IR_TableEntry for ms_struct layout
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 16:53:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230731165306-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZMgZBNEutnsDxk8A@x1n>
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 04:26:44PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 10:20:40AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 28/07/2023 16.37, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 04:27:46PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > > > We might want to compile QEMU with Clang on Windows - but it
> > > > does not support the __attribute__((gcc_struct)) yet. So we
> > > > have to make sure that the structs will stay the same when
> > > > the compiler uses the "ms_struct" layout. The VTD_IR_TableEntry
> > > > struct is affected - rewrite it a little bit so that it works
> > > > fine with both struct layouts.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h | 14 ++++++++------
> > > > hw/i386/intel_iommu.c | 2 +-
> > > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h b/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> > > > index 89dcbc5e1e..08bf220393 100644
> > > > --- a/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> > > > +++ b/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> > > > @@ -204,18 +204,20 @@ union VTD_IR_TableEntry {
> > > > #endif
> > > > uint32_t dest_id; /* Destination ID */
> > > > uint16_t source_id; /* Source-ID */
> > > > + uint16_t __reserved_2; /* Reserved 2 */
> > > > #if HOST_BIG_ENDIAN
> > > > - uint64_t __reserved_2:44; /* Reserved 2 */
> > > > - uint64_t sid_vtype:2; /* Source-ID Validation Type */
> > > > - uint64_t sid_q:2; /* Source-ID Qualifier */
> > > > + uint32_t __reserved_3:28; /* Reserved 3 */
> > > > + uint32_t sid_vtype:2; /* Source-ID Validation Type */
> > > > + uint32_t sid_q:2; /* Source-ID Qualifier */
> > > > #else
> > > > - uint64_t sid_q:2; /* Source-ID Qualifier */
> > > > - uint64_t sid_vtype:2; /* Source-ID Validation Type */
> > > > - uint64_t __reserved_2:44; /* Reserved 2 */
> > > > + uint32_t sid_q:2; /* Source-ID Qualifier */
> > > > + uint32_t sid_vtype:2; /* Source-ID Validation Type */
> > > > + uint32_t __reserved_3:28; /* Reserved 3 */
> > >
> > > Hasn't this has changed the struct layout in the else clause
> > >
> > > Old layout:
> > >
> > > source_id : 16
> > > sid_q : 2
> > > sid_vtype : 2
> > > reserved_2 : 44
> > >
> > > New layout
> > >
> > > source_id : 16
> > > reserved_2 : 16
> > > sid_q : 2
> > > sid_vtype : 2
> > > reserved_3 : 28
> >
> > Drat, you're right, I missed the fact that the whole stuff is read and
> > written via the uint64_t data[2] part from the union in the code ... :-(
>
> Yes, that's actually part of the VT-d spec.
>
> >
> > > Was there something wrong with the change I suggested to
> > > just make source_id be a bitfield too:
> > >
> > > uint64_t source_id: 16; /* Source-ID */
> > >
> > > which could make ms_struct layout avoid padding to the following
> > > bitfields.
> >
> > That likely works, but I think we then need to add it then twice, one time
> > in the HOST_BIG_ENDIAN at the end, and one time in the #else part?
> >
> > Anyway, that whole code looks like it's completely wrong on big endian
> > machines. The struct is read via dma_memory_read() from guest memory, but
> > then the values are never byte-swapped, except for the error_report and
> > trace functions, e.g. entry->irte.present is used without calling
> > le64_to_cpu() first.
> > entry->irte.source_id is swapped with le32_to_cpu() which looks also wrong
> > since this is a 16 bit field.
> >
> > Sigh. This is another good example why we shouldn't use bitfields at all in
> > structures that exchange data. As Richard suggested in his reply, this
> > really should be rewritten, e.g. with the stuff from hw/registerfields.h.
>
> I can definitely review the iommu-side changes if someone would like to
> finally enable that for either clang or whatever purpose. Sorry if it
> never worked..
>
> But then if it's broken for 7 years since the start, it probably also means
> no one ever used it on big endian hosts, either, as a functionality.. so
> another approach is we can opt-out VT-d as a whole for big endian, if
> that's easier.
>
> Thanks,
Let's just fix it properly please. Bad code proliferates.
--
MST
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-31 20:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-28 14:27 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Use Clang for compiling in the 64-bit MSYS2 job Thomas Huth
2023-07-28 14:27 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] gitlab: remove duplication between msys jobs Thomas Huth
2023-07-28 14:27 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] ui/dbus: fix clang compilation issue Thomas Huth
2023-07-28 14:27 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] util/oslib-win32: Fix compiling with Clang from MSYS2 Thomas Huth
2023-07-31 14:20 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-07-28 14:27 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] hw/i386/intel_iommu: Fix VTD_IR_TableEntry for ms_struct layout Thomas Huth
2023-07-28 14:37 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-07-28 16:39 ` Richard Henderson
2023-07-31 8:20 ` Thomas Huth
2023-07-31 20:26 ` Peter Xu
2023-07-31 20:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2023-07-28 14:27 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] include/qemu/compiler: Fix problem with gcc_struct and Clang Thomas Huth
2023-07-28 15:13 ` Peter Maydell
2023-07-31 9:10 ` Thomas Huth
2023-07-31 9:32 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-07-31 12:04 ` Thomas Huth
2023-08-03 16:29 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-07-31 14:10 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-07-31 17:25 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-08-01 13:29 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-07-31 10:05 ` Peter Maydell
2023-07-31 12:05 ` Thomas Huth
2023-07-31 12:44 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-08-01 13:49 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-08-01 18:31 ` Thomas Huth
2023-07-31 12:57 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-07-31 14:07 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-07-28 14:27 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] gitlab-ci.d/windows: Use Clang for compiling in the 64-bit MSYS2 job Thomas Huth
2023-07-31 14:23 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-07-31 14:43 ` Thomas Huth
2023-08-01 13:30 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-08-01 13:35 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] " Daniel P. Berrangé
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=20230731165306-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=luoyonggang@gmail.com \
--cc=marcandre.lureau@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=sw@weilnetz.de \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/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.