All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel@redhat.com>
To: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@ravellosystems.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-pci: Set the QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS capability early in its DeviceClass realize method
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 22:46:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <565E0729.9060603@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151201213007.2b41e810@halley>

On 12/01/2015 09:30 PM, Shmulik Ladkani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 18:36:39 +0200 Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> +    if (pci_is_express(pci_dev) && pci_bus_is_express(pci_dev->bus) &&
>>> +        !pci_bus_is_root(pci_dev->bus)) {
>>>            int pos;
>>
>> Here you should check only for 'pci_is_express(pci_dev)' .
>
> [snip]
>
>>> +static void virtio_pci_dc_realize(DeviceState *qdev, Error **errp)
>>> +{
>>> +    VirtioPCIClass *vpciklass = VIRTIO_PCI_GET_CLASS(qdev);
>>> +    VirtIOPCIProxy *proxy = VIRTIO_PCI(qdev);
>>> +    PCIDevice *pci_dev = &proxy->pci_dev;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!(proxy->flags & VIRTIO_PCI_FLAG_DISABLE_PCIE) &&
>>> +        !(proxy->flags & VIRTIO_PCI_FLAG_DISABLE_MODERN)) {
>>> +        pci_dev->cap_present |= QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS;
>>
>> And here you should also check:
>>        pci_bus_is_express(pci_dev->bus) && !pci_bus_is_root(pci_dev->bus))
>>
>> The reason is the device becomes express only if *all* the conditions
>> are met.
>
> I'm ok with either approaches.
>
> However it seems common practice to set QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS
> unconditionally for PCIE devices.
>
> The few existing PCIE devices do so by assigning their
> PCIDeviceClass.is_express to 1 within their 'class_init', regardless the
> properties of the bus their on.
> (e.g. xhci_class_init, megasas_class_init, vfio_pci_dev_class_init,
>   nvme_class_init, and more)
>
> Some devices later call pcie_endpoint_cap_init conditionally.
> (e.g. usb_xhci_realize).
>
> Can you please examine this and let me know the preferred approach?

Yes, I saw that..., as always not a walk in the park.

- So we have "is_express = true" <=> QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS on <=> "config size = PCIe"
- Not related to the above (!!), if (some condition) => add PCIe express capability
   (megasas is the exception)

Let's take "usb_xhci":
  - If we put it under a PCI bus it will not be an express device, but
    it will have a "big" config space. Also pci_is_express(dev) will still return true!
  - This is probably a bug. (or I am missing something)
NVME:
  - simple, always PCIe
Now let's see vfio-pci:
  - is_express = true (with the comment: we might be) => PCIe config
  - vfio_populate_device => checks actual register (I think),
    if not PCIe, rewinds it :
	vdev->config_size = reg_info.size;
     	if (vdev->config_size == PCI_CONFIG_SPACE_SIZE) {
         	vdev->pdev.cap_present &= ~QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS;
     	}
  - better (we still "loose" the space, but at least pci_is_express will return false)

Now virtio case:
  - If we split the conditions into 2 parts we would have usb_xhci issues:
    - PCIe config space for a PCI device if *some* conditions are not met.
    - pci_is_express will return true when we don't want that.
If you see a reason to split, please do, I only see problems :)

Our solution to make it "clean" is to not mark the class as "is_express",
but hijack realize method and add our "conditions" before calling it.

A more elegant solution would be to make is_express a method and let the subclasses
implement it:
  - vfio will look for the actual device config space
  - NVME will return true
  - usb_xhci will condition this on the bus type
  - virtio will have its own conditions.
But this is not 2.5 material.

I hope I helped,
Thanks for getting involved.
Marcel

>
>>> +    DeviceRealize saved_dc_realize;
>>
>> I would change the name to parent_realize :)
>
> Sure.
>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-01 20:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-01 16:23 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-pci: Set the QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS capability early in its DeviceClass realize method Shmulik Ladkani
2015-12-01 16:36 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2015-12-01 19:30   ` Shmulik Ladkani
2015-12-01 20:46     ` Marcel Apfelbaum [this message]
2015-12-02  8:01       ` Shmulik Ladkani
2015-12-02  9:51         ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2015-12-02 13:30           ` Shmulik Ladkani
2015-12-02 14:00             ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2015-12-02 14:27               ` Shmulik Ladkani

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=565E0729.9060603@redhat.com \
    --to=marcel@redhat.com \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=shmulik.ladkani@ravellosystems.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.