From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56837) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WusTj-0003yw-E0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:02:59 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WusTa-0007Se-Uo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:02:51 -0400 Received: from e23smtp05.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.147]:53939) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WusTa-0007Rw-5b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:02:42 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp05.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:02:35 +1000 Received: from d23relay05.au.ibm.com (d23relay05.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.152]) by d23dlp03.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BE5C3578052 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:02:32 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (d23av02.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.138]) by d23relay05.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s5BNeT4C37355580 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 09:40:30 +1000 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av02.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s5C02UDl005710 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:02:31 +1000 Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:02:30 +1000 From: Gavin Shan Message-ID: <20140612000230.GA7880@shangw> References: <1402365785-31620-1-git-send-email-gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1402365785-31620-4-git-send-email-gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1402518411.14174.173.camel@ul30vt.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1402518411.14174.173.camel@ul30vt.home> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v10 3/3] sPAPR: Implement sPAPRPHBClass::eeh_handler Reply-To: Gavin Shan List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alex Williamson Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, aik@ozlabs.ru, agraf@suse.de, Gavin Shan , qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.com On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 02:26:51PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: >On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 12:03 +1000, Gavin Shan wrote: >> The patch implements sPAPRPHBClass::eeh_handler so that the >> EEH RTAS requests can be routed to VFIO for further handling. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan >> --- >> hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >> index 592d6a4..9750cf0 100644 >> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >> @@ -85,6 +85,61 @@ static void spapr_phb_vfio_finish_realize(sPAPRPHBState *sphb, Error **errp) >> spapr_tce_get_iommu(tcet)); >> } >> >> +static int spapr_phb_vfio_eeh_handler(sPAPRPHBState *sphb, int req, int opt) >> +{ >> + sPAPRPHBVFIOState *svphb = SPAPR_PCI_VFIO_HOST_BRIDGE(sphb); >> + struct vfio_eeh_pe_op op = { .argsz = sizeof(op), .flags = 0 }; > >FWIW, flags = 0 isn't actually necessary. I'm sure someone here can >quote the C spec, but it's my understanding that if any field of a >structure is initialized, the remaining fields are zero initialized. >vfio.c has a mix of initializations depending on whether using an >explicit value for flags adds to the code clarity. > Yes, but it's not harmful. Please let me know if you want me to remove it :-) I had a very quick experiment on x86 and Power Linux with following tiny program and the result is just what you think: With "struct test foo" in func2(): func2: foo.a=0xffffffff, foo.b=0xffffffff with "static struct test foo" in func2(). Here's the explaining about this: section 2.4.2.3 of http://www.gnu.org/software/gnu-c-manual/gnu-c-manual.html#Initializing-Structure-Members func2: foo.a=0x00000000, foo.b=0x00000000 with "struct test foo = { .a = 0 }" in func2(). func2: foo.a=0x00000000, foo.b=0x00000000 With "struct test foo = { 0 }" in func2(): func2: foo.a=0x00000000, foo.b=0x00000000 --- #include struct test { int a; int b; }; static func1(void) { int var[1000]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++) var[i] = 0xffffffff; } static func2(void) { struct test foo; printf("%s: foo.a=0x%08x, foo.b=0x%08x\n", __func__, foo.a, foo.b); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { func1(); func2(); return 0; } Thanks, Gavin >> + int cmd; >> + >> + switch (req) { >> + case RTAS_EEH_REQ_SET_OPTION: >> + switch (opt) { >> + case RTAS_EEH_DISABLE: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_DISABLE; >> + break; >> + case RTAS_EEH_ENABLE: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_ENABLE; >> + break; >> + case RTAS_EEH_THAW_IO: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_UNFREEZE_IO; >> + break; >> + case RTAS_EEH_THAW_DMA: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_UNFREEZE_DMA; >> + break; >> + default: >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + break; >> + case RTAS_EEH_REQ_GET_STATE: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_GET_STATE; >> + break; >> + case RTAS_EEH_REQ_RESET: >> + switch (opt) { >> + case RTAS_SLOT_RESET_DEACTIVATE: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_RESET_DEACTIVATE; >> + break; >> + case RTAS_SLOT_RESET_HOT: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_RESET_HOT; >> + break; >> + case RTAS_SLOT_RESET_FUNDAMENTAL: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_RESET_FUNDAMENTAL; >> + break; >> + default: >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + break; >> + case RTAS_EEH_REQ_CONFIGURE: >> + cmd = VFIO_EEH_PE_CONFIGURE; >> + break; >> + default: >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + op.op = cmd; >> + return vfio_container_ioctl(&svphb->phb.iommu_as, svphb->iommugroupid, >> + VFIO_EEH_PE_OP, &op); >> +} >> + >> static void spapr_phb_vfio_reset(DeviceState *qdev) >> { >> /* Do nothing */ >> @@ -98,6 +153,7 @@ static void spapr_phb_vfio_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data) >> dc->props = spapr_phb_vfio_properties; >> dc->reset = spapr_phb_vfio_reset; >> spc->finish_realize = spapr_phb_vfio_finish_realize; >> + spc->eeh_handler = spapr_phb_vfio_eeh_handler; >> } >> >> static const TypeInfo spapr_phb_vfio_info = { >