qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] x86: gigabyte alignment for ram
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:59:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131217115936.GA30168@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1387277686.12500.35.camel@nilsson.home.kraxel.org>

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:54:46AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
> 
> > > Problem is that the firmware places the xbar @ 0xb000000.
> > > Hardcoded, assuming qemu will not map ram above 0xb0000000.
> > 
> > Can't bios figure out the size of memory below 4G from fwcfg?
> > I refer to 7db16f2480db5e246d34d0c453cff4f58549df0e specifically.
> 
> It can, but it doesn't.
> 
> Additional issue for coreboot is that mmconfig base is a compile-time
> constant, because it is setup _very_ early in the boot process.
> Coreboot then does the whole pci initialization using mmconfig.
> 
> On the other hand coreboot has a much more sophisticated ressource
> management than seabios, so moving the mmconf xbar up to to
> 0xe0000000-0xefffffff, then managing two regions (below 0xe0000000 and
> above 0xf0000000) for pci bars probably isn't a big issue for coreboot.
> 
> > > So, we must (a) fix firmware first and (b) get a ugly dependency
> > > that older firmware will not run on latest qemu.
> > 
> > That's only important for old machine types though, right?
> 
> Correct.  That makes it a bit less problematic, but it is still not very
> nice.
> 
> > > We also need to figure how we wanna fixup things.  So, current memory
> > > layout looks like this:
> > > 
> > >    0x00000000 - 0xafffffff  --  RAM / unused
> > >    0xb0000000 - 0xbfffffff  --  mmconfig xbar [256 pci busses]
> > >    0xc0000000 - 0xfec00000  --  space for pci bars, almost 1g
> > > 
> > > Largest pci bar we can map below 4g is 512m, @ 0xc0000000.
> > > 
> > > If we wanna map 3G RAM we need to move the xbar somewhere else.  Big
> > > question is where?
> > > 
> > > We can move it to 0xc0000000.  Then we can't map 512m pci bars any more.
> > 
> > I would go for this when we have 3G of RAM.
> > I think that ability to support a single 512m BAR is not all that important.
> 
> Use case: pci passthrough of graphics cards.
> 
> > > We can move it to 0xe0000000.  Then we have to split the pci bar space,
> > > mapping large bars below 0xe0000000 and small ones above 0xf0000000.
> > > SeaBIOS pci init code isn't really up to it.
> > > Could also become tricky
> > > to declare it correctly in acpi / e820 due to the split.
> > 
> > My laptop's ACPI has this space all fragmented up, seems to boot fine ...
> 
> We need to change the way we reserve the mmconfig space though.  
> 
> Currently it is marked reserved in the e820 table.  Having that overlap
> with the _CRS region makes windows quite unhappy, we tried that
> recently.

Yes this also contradicts the spec, see below.

> My laptop has the mmconfig space declared as LPC ressource:
> 
>             Device (LPC)
>             {
>                 Name (_ADR, 0x001F0000)  // _ADR: Address
>                 Name (_S3D, 0x03)  // _S3D: S3 Device State
>                 Name (RID, 0x00)
>                 Device (SIO)
>                 {
>                     Name (_HID, EisaId ("PNP0C02"))
>                     Name (_UID, 0x00)  // _UID: Unique ID
>                     Name (SCRS, ResourceTemplate ()
> [ ... ]
>                         Memory32Fixed (ReadWrite,
>                             0xF8000000,         // Address Base
>                             0x04000000,         // Address Length
>                             )
> [ ... ]
>                     Method (_CRS, 0, NotSerialized)
> [ ... return SCRS, with updates applied in some cases ... ]
> 
> When doing it this way we can simply make the PCI0._CRS cover the whole
> end-of-ram -> ioapic-base range, simliar to piix, and we are pretty free
> to place the mmconfig xbar anywhere in that area.

The spec says:
	2.If the operating system does not natively comprehend reserving the
	MMCFG region, the
	MMCFG region must be reserved by firmware. The address range reported in
	the MCFG table
	or by _CBA method (see Section 4.1.3) must be reserved by declaring a
	motherboard resource.
	For most systems, the motherboard resource would appear at the root of
	the ACPI namespace
	(under \_SB) in a node with a _HID of EISAID (PNP0C02), and the
	resources in this case
	should not be claimed in the root PCI bus’s _CRS. The resources can
	optionally be returned in
	Int15 E820 or EFIGetMemoryMap as reserved memory but must always be
	reported through
	ACPI as a motherboard resource.

My reading of the above is that this can be an LPC resource but
claiming this as the root's _CRS isn't ok then.

> 
> Doing the transition is non-trivial though because we (a) move the job
> of reserving the mmconfig area from firmware to qemu and (b) the testing
> needed for that.
> 
> Maybe we should set the gbyte alignment on q35 aside for a while and
> tackle the mmconfig reservation handling first.
> 
> cheers,
>   Gerd

I merged your patch but split it: q35 is separate and piix
is separate. Would you like me to drop the q35 part then?

  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-17 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-16  9:11 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] x86: gigabyte alignment for ram Gerd Hoffmann
2013-12-16 11:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-12-16 13:46   ` Gerd Hoffmann
2013-12-16 19:28     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-12-17 10:54       ` Gerd Hoffmann
2013-12-17 11:59         ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2013-12-17 17:56           ` Gerd Hoffmann
2013-12-18 10:05             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-20 11:23             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-20 12:58               ` Gerd Hoffmann
2014-01-20 13:59                 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-20 14:01                   ` Gerd Hoffmann
2014-01-20 14:22                     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-20 15:36                       ` Gerd Hoffmann
2014-01-20 15:51                         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-20 17:15                           ` Igor Mammedov
2014-01-21  7:27                             ` Gerd Hoffmann

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=20131217115936.GA30168@redhat.com \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
    --cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).