From: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: Fred Gao <fred.gao@intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Swee Yee Fonn <swee.yee.fonn@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 13:09:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210202050939.GD1538@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210121133318.3f0824e8@omen.home.shazbot.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4739 bytes --]
On 2021.01.21 13:33:18 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 20:38:34 +0800
> Fred Gao <fred.gao@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Before opregion version 2.0 VBT data is stored in opregion mailbox #4,
> > However, When VBT data exceeds 6KB size and cannot be within mailbox #4
> > starting from opregion v2.0+, Extended VBT region, next to opregion, is
> > used to hold the VBT data, so the total size will be opregion size plus
> > extended VBT region size.
> >
> > Cc: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Swee Yee Fonn <swee.yee.fonn@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Fred Gao <fred.gao@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_igd.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_igd.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_igd.c
> > index 53d97f459252..fc470278a492 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_igd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_igd.c
> > @@ -21,6 +21,10 @@
> > #define OPREGION_SIZE (8 * 1024)
> > #define OPREGION_PCI_ADDR 0xfc
> >
> > +#define OPREGION_RVDA 0x3ba
> > +#define OPREGION_RVDS 0x3c2
> > +#define OPREGION_VERSION 0x16
> > +
> > static size_t vfio_pci_igd_rw(struct vfio_pci_device *vdev, char __user *buf,
> > size_t count, loff_t *ppos, bool iswrite)
> > {
> > @@ -58,6 +62,7 @@ static int vfio_pci_igd_opregion_init(struct vfio_pci_device *vdev)
> > u32 addr, size;
> > void *base;
> > int ret;
> > + u16 version;
> >
> > ret = pci_read_config_dword(vdev->pdev, OPREGION_PCI_ADDR, &addr);
> > if (ret)
> > @@ -83,6 +88,60 @@ static int vfio_pci_igd_opregion_init(struct vfio_pci_device *vdev)
> >
> > size *= 1024; /* In KB */
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Support opregion v2.0+
> > + * When VBT data exceeds 6KB size and cannot be within mailbox #4
> > + * Extended VBT region, next to opregion, is used to hold the VBT data.
> > + * RVDA (Relative Address of VBT Data from Opregion Base) and RVDS
> > + * (VBT Data Size) from opregion structure member are used to hold the
> > + * address from region base and size of VBT data while RVDA/RVDS
> > + * are not defined before opregion 2.0.
> > + *
> > + * opregion 2.0: rvda is the physical VBT address.
> > + *
> > + * opregion 2.1+: rvda is unsigned, relative offset from
> > + * opregion base, and should never point within opregion.
> > + */
> > + version = le16_to_cpu(*(__le16 *)(base + OPREGION_VERSION));
> > + if (version >= 0x0200) {
> > + u64 rvda;
> > + u32 rvds;
> > +
> > + rvda = le64_to_cpu(*(__le64 *)(base + OPREGION_RVDA));
> > + rvds = le32_to_cpu(*(__le32 *)(base + OPREGION_RVDS));
> > + if (rvda && rvds) {
> > + u32 offset;
> > +
> > + if (version == 0x0200)
> > + offset = rvda - (u64)addr;
> > + else
> > + offset = rvda;
> > +
> > + if (offset != size) {
> > + pci_err(vdev->pdev,
> > + "Extended VBT does not follow opregion !\n"
> > + "opregion version 0x%x:offset 0x%x\n", version, offset);
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * the only difference between opregion 2.0 and 2.1 is
> > + * rvda addressing mode. since rvda is physical host
> > + * VBT address and cannot be directly used in guest,
> > + * faked into opregion 2.1's relative offset.
> > + */
> > + if (version == 0x0200) {
> > + *(__le16 *)(base + OPREGION_VERSION) =
> > + cpu_to_le16(0x0201);
> > + (*(__le64 *)(base + OPREGION_RVDA)) =
> > + cpu_to_le64((rvda - (u64)addr));
> > + }
>
> There's a much better description of the fields and logic here, thanks
> for that. I also see we've closed the gap to require the extended
> region to immediately follow the opregion table. The code
> immediately above still makes me nervous as even if this is the only
> difference between the specs, code might make some differentiation
> based on the spec version, which we're changing in host memory for all
> subsequent drivers until the host is rebooted. Could we use a pci_dbg()
> in this branch to flag that event in dmesg for debugging? Thanks,
>
Alex, that's really valid concern, even we thought it should be no problem,
we asked firmware team again, it looks for opregion 2.0 with VBT >6k case (RVDA != 0)
is not practically available for end user. So I think we may just not support
for that. For opregion 2.1+, just extend the size properly.
Thanks
>
> > +
> > + /* region size for opregion v2.0+: opregion and VBT size */
> > + size = offset + rvds;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > if (size != OPREGION_SIZE) {
> > memunmap(base);
> > base = memremap(addr, size, MEMREMAP_WB);
>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-02 5:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-02 17:12 [PATCH v1] vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.0+ Fred Gao
2020-12-02 18:57 ` Alex Williamson
2020-12-03 9:21 ` Gao, Fred
2020-12-03 23:38 ` Alex Williamson
2021-01-18 12:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Fred Gao
2021-01-21 20:33 ` Alex Williamson
2021-02-02 5:09 ` Zhenyu Wang [this message]
2021-02-08 17:02 ` [PATCH v3] vfio/pci: Add support for opregion v2.1+ Fred Gao
2021-03-02 13:02 ` [PATCH v4] " Fred Gao
2021-03-19 19:26 ` Alex Williamson
2021-03-25 8:50 ` Gao, Fred
2021-03-25 17:09 ` [PATCH v5] " Fred Gao
2021-03-30 9:08 ` Zhenyu Wang
2021-04-06 19:37 ` Alex Williamson
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=20210202050939.GD1538@zhen-hp.sh.intel.com \
--to=zhenyuw@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=fred.gao@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=swee.yee.fonn@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox