From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43751) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dp9Eo-0000PU-4A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 04:29:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dp9Ej-0006zm-Bk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 04:29:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47278) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dp9Ej-0006zB-2q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 04:29:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 10:29:28 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170905102928.6b23a28a.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1504239778-29893-2-git-send-email-zyimin@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1504239778-29893-1-git-send-email-zyimin@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1504239778-29893-2-git-send-email-zyimin@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] s390x/pci: remove idx from msix msg data List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Yi Min Zhao Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, richard.henderson@linaro.org On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 06:22:56 +0200 Yi Min Zhao wrote: > PCIDevice pointer has been a parameter of kvm_arch_fixup_msi_route(). > So we don't need to store zpci idx in msix message data to find out the > specific zpci device. Instead, we could use pci device id to find its > corresponding zpci device. > > Signed-off-by: Yi Min Zhao > --- > hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 16 +++++----------- > hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.h | 2 ++ > hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c | 24 ------------------------ > hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c | 6 ++++++ > target/s390x/kvm.c | 7 +++++-- > 5 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > index 0a31a4ae88..bd8a3e1e1c 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > @@ -199,8 +199,8 @@ static S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_uid(S390pciState *s, uint16_t uid) > return NULL; > } > > -static S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(S390pciState *s, > - const char *target) > +S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(S390pciState *s, > + const char *target) > { > S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev; > > @@ -465,19 +465,13 @@ static void s390_msi_ctrl_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t data, > unsigned int size) > { > S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev = opaque; > - uint32_t idx = data >> ZPCI_MSI_VEC_BITS; > uint32_t vec = data & ZPCI_MSI_VEC_MASK; > uint64_t ind_bit; > uint32_t sum_bit; > - uint32_t e = 0; > > - DPRINTF("write_msix data 0x%" PRIx64 " idx %d vec 0x%x\n", data, idx, vec); > - > - if (!pbdev) { > - e |= (vec << ERR_EVENT_MVN_OFFSET); > - s390_pci_generate_error_event(ERR_EVENT_NOMSI, idx, 0, addr, e); > - return; > - } > + assert(pbdev); I'm wondering whether you could/should generate an error event here. The one above probably won't work (as it seems to take idx as a parameter), but is this really 'this must not happen, we messed up in our code'? (Probably yes, but I want to be sure.) > + DPRINTF("write_msix data 0x%" PRIx64 " idx %d vec 0x%x\n", data, > + pbdev->idx, vec); > > if (pbdev->state != ZPCI_FS_ENABLED) { > return; > diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c > index 7a642d376c..e501e1b9ea 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c > @@ -74,3 +74,9 @@ S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx(S390pciState *s, uint32_t idx) > { > return NULL; > } Please remove s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx() from the stubs file, as it is not used outside of the conditionally-built pci code anymore. > + > +S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(S390pciState *s, > + const char *target) > +{ > + return NULL; > +} > diff --git a/target/s390x/kvm.c b/target/s390x/kvm.c > index 1338c29528..3d490c5e4b 100644 > --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c > +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c > @@ -2533,10 +2533,13 @@ int kvm_arch_fixup_msi_route(struct kvm_irq_routing_entry *route, > uint64_t address, uint32_t data, PCIDevice *dev) > { > S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev; > - uint32_t idx = data >> ZPCI_MSI_VEC_BITS; > uint32_t vec = data & ZPCI_MSI_VEC_MASK; > > - pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx(s390_get_phb(), idx); > + if (!dev) { > + return -ENODEV; Can this actually happen? > + } > + > + pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s390_get_phb(), DEVICE(dev)->id); > if (!pbdev) { > DPRINTF("add_msi_route no dev\n"); > return -ENODEV;