Re: [PATCH RFC 04/15] drivers/base: Add support for a new IMS irq domain

Dey, Megha
2020-05-04T00:25:32Z

On 5/3/2020 3:46 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 03:40:44PM -0700, Dey, Megha wrote:
>> On 5/3/2020 3:25 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 03:30:02PM -0700, Dey, Megha wrote:
>>>> Hi Jason,
>>>>
>>>> On 4/23/2020 1:11 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 04:34:11PM -0700, Dave Jiang wrote:
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/ims-msi.c b/drivers/base/ims-msi.c
>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>> index 000000000000..738f6d153155
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/ims-msi.c
>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
>>>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>> + * Support for Device Specific IMS interrupts.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * Copyright © 2019 Intel Corporation.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * Author: Megha Dey <megha.dey@intel.com>
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +#include <linux/dmar.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/irq.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/mdev.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/pci.h>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>> + * Determine if a dev is mdev or not. Return NULL if not mdev device.
>>>>>> + * Return mdev's parent dev if success.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +static inline struct device *mdev_to_parent(struct device *dev)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct device *ret = NULL;
>>>>>> + struct device *(*fn)(struct device *dev);
>>>>>> + struct bus_type *bus = symbol_get(mdev_bus_type);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (bus && dev->bus == bus) {
>>>>>> + fn = symbol_get(mdev_dev_to_parent_dev);
>>>>>> + ret = fn(dev);
>>>>>> + symbol_put(mdev_dev_to_parent_dev);
>>>>>> + symbol_put(mdev_bus_type);
>>>>>
>>>>> No, things like this are not OK in the drivers/base
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever this is doing needs to be properly architected in some
>>>>> generic way.
>>>>
>>>> Basically what I am trying to do here is to determine if the device is an
>>>> mdev device or not.
>>>
>>> Why? mdev devices are virtual they don't have HW elements.
>>
>> Hmm yeah exactly, since they are virtual, they do not have an associated IRQ
>> domain right? So they use the irq domain of the parent device..
>>
>>>
>>> The caller should use the concrete pci_device to allocate
>>> platform_msi? What is preventing this?
>>
>> hmmm do you mean to say all platform-msi adhere to the rules of a PCI
>> device?
>
> I mean where a platform-msi can work should be defined by the arch,
> and probably is related to things like having an irq_domain attached
>
> So, like pci, drivers must only try to do platfor_msi stuff on
> particular devices. eg on pci_device and platform_device types.
>
> Even so it may not even work, but I can't think of any reason why it
> should be made to work on a virtual device like mdev.
>
>> The use case if when we have a device assigned to a guest and we
>> want to allocate IMS(platform-msi) interrupts for that
>> guest-assigned device. Currently, this is abstracted through a mdev
>> interface.
>
> And the mdev has the pci_device internally, so it should simply pass
> that pci_device to the platform_msi machinery.

hmm i am not sure I follow this. mdev has a pci_device internally? which
struct are you referring to here?

mdev is merely a micropartitioned PCI device right, which no real PCI
resource backing. I am not how else we can find the IRQ domain
associated with an mdev..

>
> This is no different from something like pci_iomap() which must be
> used with the pci_device.
>
> Jason
>