From: "Yang, Sheng" <sheng.yang@intel.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@hp.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: device-assignment: Add PCI option ROM support
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:25:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200906230925.20928.sheng.yang@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1245686968.4661.13.camel@2710p.home>
On Tuesday 23 June 2009 00:09:28 Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 13:32 +0800, Yang, Sheng wrote:
> > On Friday 19 June 2009 21:44:40 Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 15:27 +0800, Yang, Sheng wrote:
> > > > On Friday 19 June 2009 00:28:41 Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > The one oddity I noticed is that even when the enable bit is clear,
> > > > > the guest can read the ROM. I don't know that this is actually
> > > > > illegal, vs returning zeros or ones though. It seems like maybe
> > > > > the generic PCI code isn't tracking the enable bit. I think that's
> > > > > an independent problem from this patch though. Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > That should be fine. I've taken a look at code, seems Linux kernel
> > > > set enable_bit when someone begin to read rom, and copy rom to
> > > > buffer, then unmap the rom. So the rom can be read when enable bit
> > > > clear.
> > >
> > > For this testing, I used an mmap of the ROM address though, so the
> > > kernel caching shouldn't have been involved. It looks to me like the
> > > problem is that the map function provided via pci_register_io_region()
> > > only knows how to create mappings, not tear them down. I think maybe
> > > pci_update_mappings() should still call the map_func when new_addr is
> > > -1 to let the io space drive shutdown the mapping. As it is, once we
> > > setup the mapping, it lives until something else happens to overlap it,
> > > regardless of the state of the PCI BAR. Thanks,
> >
> > I think it may not necessary to tear them down, for the bar mapping won't
> > change IIUR.
>
> We can't guarantee that, the OS can move them if it understands the
> resources available to the PCI bus. It typically doesn't move them
> though.
>
> > And you are accessing the sysfs file, right? In the Linux kernel, IIRC,
> > pci_create_sysfs_dev_files() create sysfs file, and hook the read to
> > pci_read_rom(), which called pci_map_rom(), which would call
> > pci_enable_rom(), and write the enable_rom bit to the rom_base_reg. So
> > that the rom can be read regardless of enable_rom bit state - and .
> >
> > But I also found something interested. The write hook of file,
> > pci_write_rom() seems won't cause NMI(and seems you need write a char
> > rather than 0 to enable the accessing?). So why NMI happen in host?...
>
> As I mentioned, I'm not using the /sys files to write to the ROM
> precisely because the rom write function is only to enable/disable the
> ROM BAR. I'm using setpci to manually enable the ROM, then I use the
> test program below to mmap the ROM address from /dev/mem, read part of
> it, try to write the first few bytes, then read it back. You'll need to
> change the hard coded address if you want to test yourself. Obviously
> don't do it on a system in use by others since it will likely take it
> down. Thanks,
Oh, yes. Sorry for completely miss the method... Yeah, by this method, the ROM
shouldn't present to guest. And you are right, the PCI mapping is in only one
direction. I think we can fix it in QEmu upstream.
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
>
> Alex
>
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
>
> #define DEV_MEM "/dev/mem"
> #define ROM_ADDR 0xe6300000
>
> int main(void)
> {
> unsigned char *map;
> int i, fd = open(DEV_MEM, O_RDWR);
>
> if (fd == -1) {
> printf("Failed to open /dev/mem: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> return -1;
> }
>
> map = mmap(NULL, getpagesize(), PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE,
> MAP_SHARED, fd, ROM_ADDR);
>
> if (map == MAP_FAILED) {
> printf("Failed to mmap /dev/mem: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> close(fd);
> return -1;
> }
>
> for (i = 0; i < 64;) {
> printf("%02x", map[i++]);
> if (i % 16 == 0)
> printf("\n");
> else if (i % 4 == 0)
> printf(" ");
> else
> printf(" ");
> }
>
> printf("Writing...");
> map[0] = 0xba;
> map[1] = 0xdb;
> map[2] = 0xad;
> map[3] = 0xc0;
> map[4] = 0xff;
> map[5] = 0xee;
> printf("done\n");
>
> for (i = 0; i < 64;) {
> printf("%02x", map[i++]);
> if (i % 16 == 0)
> printf("\n");
> else if (i % 4 == 0)
> printf(" ");
> else
> printf(" ");
> }
>
> munmap(map, getpagesize());
> close(fd);
> return 0;
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-23 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-15 16:29 [PATCH] kvm: device-assignment: Add PCI option ROM support Alex Williamson
2009-06-18 5:30 ` Yang, Sheng
2009-06-18 16:28 ` Alex Williamson
2009-06-19 7:27 ` Yang, Sheng
2009-06-19 13:44 ` Alex Williamson
2009-06-22 5:32 ` Yang, Sheng
2009-06-22 16:09 ` Alex Williamson
2009-06-23 1:25 ` Yang, Sheng [this message]
2009-06-22 8:38 ` Avi Kivity
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=200906230925.20928.sheng.yang@intel.com \
--to=sheng.yang@intel.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@hp.com \
--cc=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox