Re: [PATCH v11 18/26] virt: gunyah: Translate gh_rm_hyp_resource into gunyah_resource

[Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com>]

On 3/31/2023 7:26 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
> On 3/3/23 7:06 PM, Elliot Berman wrote:
>> When booting a Gunyah virtual machine, the host VM may gain capabilities
>> to interact with resources for the guest virtual machine. Examples of
>> such resources are vCPUs or message queues. To use those resources, we
>> need to translate the RM response into a gunyah_resource structure which
>> are useful to Linux drivers. Presently, Linux drivers need only to know
>> the type of resource, the capability ID, and an interrupt.
>>
>> On ARM64 systems, the interrupt reported by Gunyah is the GIC interrupt
>> ID number and always a SPI.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com>
> 
> Several comments here, nothing major.    -Alex
> 
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/include/asm/gunyah.h |  23 +++++
>>   drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c   | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   include/linux/gunyah.h          |   4 +
>>   include/linux/gunyah_rsc_mgr.h  |   3 +
>>   4 files changed, 192 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/gunyah.h
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/gunyah.h 
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/gunyah.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..64cfb964efee
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/gunyah.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright (c) 2022 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights 
>> reserved.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef __ASM_GUNYAH_H_
>> +#define __ASM_GUNYAH_H_
> 
> Maybe just one _ at the beginning and none at the end?
> Follow the same convention across all your header files.
> (Maybe you're looking at other files in the same directory
> as this one, but that's not consistent.)
> 
>> +
>> +#include <linux/irq.h>
>> +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +
>> +static inline int arch_gh_fill_irq_fwspec_params(u32 virq, struct 
>> irq_fwspec *fwspec)
>> +{
>> +    if (virq < 32 || virq > 1019)
>> +        return -EINVAL;
> 
> What is special about VIRQs greater than 1019 (minus 32)?
> 
> It's probably documented somewhere but it's worth adding a
> comment here to explain the check.
> 
> You would know better than I, but could/should the caller
> be responsible for this check?  (Not a big deal.)
> 

I think definitely not the caller should be responsible for this check.

On arm systems, the IRQ # that is returned is the hwirq # for the GIC.

Presently, Gunyah only gives us SPI interrupts [32,1019] so I've written 
a translation to a SPI fwspec.

>> +
>> +    fwspec->param_count = 3;
>> +    fwspec->param[0] = GIC_SPI;
>> +    fwspec->param[1] = virq - 32;
> 
> And why is 32 subtracted?
> 

GIC driver expects the SPI #, not the hwirq #.

>> +    fwspec->param[2] = IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
>> +    return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#endif
>> diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c 
>> b/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c
>> index d7ce692d0067..383be5ac0f44 100644
>> --- a/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c
>> +++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>>   #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>   #include <linux/miscdevice.h>
>> +#include <asm/gunyah.h>
>> +
>>   #include "rsc_mgr.h"
>>   #include "vm_mgr.h"
>> @@ -132,6 +134,7 @@ struct gh_rm_connection {
>>    * @send_lock: synchronization to allow only one request to be sent 
>> at a time
>>    * @nh: notifier chain for clients interested in RM notification 
>> messages
>>    * @miscdev: /dev/gunyah
>> + * @irq_domain: Domain to translate Gunyah hwirqs to Linux irqs
>>    */
>>   struct gh_rm {
>>       struct device *dev;
>> @@ -150,6 +153,7 @@ struct gh_rm {
>>       struct blocking_notifier_head nh;
>>       struct miscdevice miscdev;
>> +    struct irq_domain *irq_domain;
>>   };
>>   /**
>> @@ -190,6 +194,134 @@ static inline int gh_rm_remap_error(enum 
>> gh_rm_error rm_error)
>>       }
>>   }
>> +struct gh_irq_chip_data {
>> +    u32 gh_virq;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct irq_chip gh_rm_irq_chip = {
>> +    .name            = "Gunyah",
>> +    .irq_enable        = irq_chip_enable_parent,
>> +    .irq_disable        = irq_chip_disable_parent,
>> +    .irq_ack        = irq_chip_ack_parent,
>> +    .irq_mask        = irq_chip_mask_parent,
>> +    .irq_mask_ack        = irq_chip_mask_ack_parent,
>> +    .irq_unmask        = irq_chip_unmask_parent,
>> +    .irq_eoi        = irq_chip_eoi_parent,
>> +    .irq_set_affinity    = irq_chip_set_affinity_parent,
>> +    .irq_set_type        = irq_chip_set_type_parent,
>> +    .irq_set_wake        = irq_chip_set_wake_parent,
>> +    .irq_set_vcpu_affinity    = irq_chip_set_vcpu_affinity_parent,
>> +    .irq_retrigger        = irq_chip_retrigger_hierarchy,
>> +    .irq_get_irqchip_state    = irq_chip_get_parent_state,
>> +    .irq_set_irqchip_state    = irq_chip_set_parent_state,
>> +    .flags            = IRQCHIP_SET_TYPE_MASKED |
>> +                  IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE |
>> +                  IRQCHIP_MASK_ON_SUSPEND,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int gh_rm_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int 
>> virq, unsigned int nr_irqs,
>> +                 void *arg)
>> +{
>> +    struct gh_irq_chip_data *chip_data, *spec = arg;
>> +    struct irq_fwspec parent_fwspec;
>> +    struct gh_rm *rm = d->host_data;
>> +    u32 gh_virq = spec->gh_virq;
>> +    int ret;
>> +
>> +    if (nr_irqs != 1 || gh_virq == U32_MAX)
> 
> Does U32_MAX have special meaning?  Why are you checking for it?
> Whatever it is, you should explain why this is invalid here.
> 

This was holdover from deprecated Gunyah code. Since there are new 
features/version checks it's not possible for Linux to encounter these 
values. I've dropped it in v12.


Thanks,
Elliot

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel