From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Cc: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/25] hw/cxl/device: Add memory devices (8.2.8.5)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 16:37:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201116163722.000079f4@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201111054724.794888-9-ben.widawsky@intel.com>
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 21:47:07 -0800
Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com> wrote:
> Memory devices implement extra capabilities on top of CXL devices. This
> adds support for that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
> ---
> hw/cxl/cxl-device-utils.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> hw/cxl/cxl-mailbox-utils.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> include/hw/cxl/cxl_device.h | 15 ++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/cxl/cxl-device-utils.c b/hw/cxl/cxl-device-utils.c
> index aec8b0d421..6544a68567 100644
> --- a/hw/cxl/cxl-device-utils.c
> +++ b/hw/cxl/cxl-device-utils.c
> @@ -158,6 +158,45 @@ static void mailbox_reg_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset, uint64_t value,
> process_mailbox(cxl_dstate);
> }
>
> +static uint64_t mdev_reg_read(void *opaque, hwaddr offset, unsigned size)
> +{
> + uint64_t retval = 0;
> +
> + retval = FIELD_DP64(retval, CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, MEDIA_STATUS, 1);
> + retval = FIELD_DP64(retval, CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, MBOX_READY, 1);
> +
> + switch (size) {
> + case 4:
> + if (unlikely(offset & (sizeof(uint32_t) - 1))) {
> + qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, "Unaligned register read\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> + break;
> + case 8:
> + if (unlikely(offset & (sizeof(uint64_t) - 1))) {
> + qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, "Unaligned register read\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return ldn_le_p(&retval, size);
> +}
> +
> +static const MemoryRegionOps mdev_ops = {
> + .read = mdev_reg_read,
> + .write = NULL,
> + .endianness = DEVICE_LITTLE_ENDIAN,
> + .valid = {
> + .min_access_size = 4,
> + .max_access_size = 8,
> + },
> + .impl = {
> + .min_access_size = 4,
> + .max_access_size = 8,
> + },
> +};
> +
> static const MemoryRegionOps mailbox_ops = {
> .read = mailbox_reg_read,
> .write = mailbox_reg_write,
> @@ -213,6 +252,9 @@ void cxl_device_register_block_init(Object *obj, CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate)
> "device-status", CXL_DEVICE_REGISTERS_LENGTH);
> memory_region_init_io(&cxl_dstate->mailbox, obj, &mailbox_ops, cxl_dstate,
> "mailbox", CXL_MAILBOX_REGISTERS_LENGTH);
> + memory_region_init_io(&cxl_dstate->memory_device, obj, &mdev_ops,
> + cxl_dstate, "memory device caps",
> + CXL_MEMORY_DEVICE_REGISTERS_LENGTH);
>
> memory_region_add_subregion(&cxl_dstate->device_registers, 0,
> &cxl_dstate->caps);
> @@ -221,6 +263,9 @@ void cxl_device_register_block_init(Object *obj, CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate)
> &cxl_dstate->device);
> memory_region_add_subregion(&cxl_dstate->device_registers,
> CXL_MAILBOX_REGISTERS_OFFSET, &cxl_dstate->mailbox);
> + memory_region_add_subregion(&cxl_dstate->device_registers,
> + CXL_MEMORY_DEVICE_REGISTERS_OFFSET,
> + &cxl_dstate->memory_device);
> }
>
> static void mailbox_init_common(uint32_t *mbox_regs)
> @@ -233,7 +278,7 @@ static void mailbox_init_common(uint32_t *mbox_regs)
> void cxl_device_register_init_common(CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate)
> {
> uint32_t *cap_hdrs = cxl_dstate->caps_reg_state32;
> - const int cap_count = 1;
Guessing this should previously have been 2?
> + const int cap_count = 3;
>
> /* CXL Device Capabilities Array Register */
> ARRAY_FIELD_DP32(cap_hdrs, CXL_DEV_CAP_ARRAY, CAP_ID, 0);
> @@ -242,6 +287,7 @@ void cxl_device_register_init_common(CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate)
>
> cxl_device_cap_init(cxl_dstate, DEVICE, 1);
> cxl_device_cap_init(cxl_dstate, MAILBOX, 2);
> + cxl_device_cap_init(cxl_dstate, MEMORY_DEVICE, 0x4000);
>
> mailbox_init_common(cxl_dstate->mbox_reg_state32);
> }
> diff --git a/hw/cxl/cxl-mailbox-utils.c b/hw/cxl/cxl-mailbox-utils.c
> index 2d1b0ef9e4..5d2579800e 100644
> --- a/hw/cxl/cxl-mailbox-utils.c
> +++ b/hw/cxl/cxl-mailbox-utils.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,12 @@
> #include "hw/pci/pci.h"
> #include "hw/cxl/cxl.h"
>
> +enum cxl_opcode {
> + CXL_EVENTS = 0x1,
> + CXL_IDENTIFY = 0x40,
> + #define CXL_IDENTIFY_MEMORY_DEVICE = 0x0
> +};
> +
> /* 8.2.8.4.5.1 Command Return Codes */
> enum {
> RET_SUCCESS = 0x0,
> @@ -40,6 +46,43 @@ enum {
> RET_MAX = 0x17
> };
>
> +/* 8.2.9.5.1.1 */
> +static int cmd_set_identify(CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate, uint8_t cmd,
> + uint32_t *ret_size)
I'm a bit confused on naming here, perhaps rsp_set_identity makes
it clearer which direction this is going in? I think this is
filling in the reply for a command from software running on the
system. Naming seems to me to suggest we are setting the identity
of the hardware.
> +{
> + struct identify {
> + char fw_revision[0x10];
> + uint64_t total_capacity;
> + uint64_t volatile_capacity;
> + uint64_t persistent_capacity;
> + uint64_t partition_align;
> + uint16_t info_event_log_size;
> + uint16_t warning_event_log_size;
> + uint16_t failure_event_log_size;
> + uint16_t fatal_event_log_size;
> + uint32_t lsa_size;
> + uint8_t poison_list_max_mer[3];
> + uint16_t inject_poison_limit;
> + uint8_t poison_caps;
> + uint8_t qos_telemetry_caps;
> + } __attribute__((packed)) *id;
> + _Static_assert(sizeof(struct identify) == 0x43, "Bad identify size");
> +
> + if (memory_region_size(cxl_dstate->pmem) < (256 << 20)) {
> + return RET_ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + /* PMEM only */
> + id = (struct identify *)((void *)cxl_dstate->mbox_reg_state +
> + A_CXL_DEV_CMD_PAYLOAD);
> + snprintf(id->fw_revision, 0x10, "BWFW VERSION %02d", 0);
> + id->total_capacity = memory_region_size(cxl_dstate->pmem);
> + id->persistent_capacity = memory_region_size(cxl_dstate->pmem);
> +
> + *ret_size = 0x43;
> + return RET_SUCCESS;
> +}
> +
> void process_mailbox(CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate)
> {
> uint16_t ret = RET_SUCCESS;
> @@ -63,8 +106,11 @@ void process_mailbox(CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate)
>
> uint8_t cmd_set = FIELD_EX64(command_reg, CXL_DEV_MAILBOX_CMD, COMMAND_SET);
> uint8_t cmd = FIELD_EX64(command_reg, CXL_DEV_MAILBOX_CMD, COMMAND);
> - (void)cmd;
Clean this stuff up before v2.
> switch (cmd_set) {
> + case CXL_IDENTIFY:
> + ret = cmd_set_identify(cxl_dstate, cmd, &ret_len);
> + /* Fill in payload here */
> + break;
> default:
> ret = RET_ENOTSUP;
> }
> diff --git a/include/hw/cxl/cxl_device.h b/include/hw/cxl/cxl_device.h
> index df00998def..2cb2a9af3c 100644
> --- a/include/hw/cxl/cxl_device.h
> +++ b/include/hw/cxl/cxl_device.h
> @@ -69,6 +69,10 @@
> #define CXL_MAILBOX_REGISTERS_LENGTH \
> (CXL_MAILBOX_REGISTERS_SIZE + CXL_MAILBOX_MAX_PAYLOAD_SIZE)
>
> +#define CXL_MEMORY_DEVICE_REGISTERS_OFFSET \
> + (CXL_MAILBOX_REGISTERS_OFFSET + CXL_MAILBOX_REGISTERS_LENGTH)
> +#define CXL_MEMORY_DEVICE_REGISTERS_LENGTH 0x8
> +
> typedef struct cxl_device_state {
> /* Boss container and caps registers */
> MemoryRegion device_registers;
> @@ -76,6 +80,7 @@ typedef struct cxl_device_state {
> MemoryRegion caps;
> MemoryRegion device;
> MemoryRegion mailbox;
> + MemoryRegion memory_device;
>
> MemoryRegion *pmem;
> MemoryRegion *vmem;
> @@ -131,6 +136,8 @@ REG32(CXL_DEV_CAP_ARRAY2, 4) /* We're going to pretend it's 64b */
> CXL_DEVICE_CAPABILITY_HEADER_REGISTER(DEVICE, CXL_DEVICE_CAP_HDR1_OFFSET)
> CXL_DEVICE_CAPABILITY_HEADER_REGISTER(MAILBOX, CXL_DEVICE_CAP_HDR1_OFFSET + \
> CXL_DEVICE_CAP_REG_SIZE)
> +CXL_DEVICE_CAPABILITY_HEADER_REGISTER(MEMORY_DEVICE, CXL_DEVICE_CAP_HDR1_OFFSET + \
> + CXL_DEVICE_CAP_REG_SIZE * 2)
>
> void process_mailbox(CXLDeviceState *cxl_dstate);
>
> @@ -181,4 +188,12 @@ REG32(CXL_DEV_BG_CMD_STS, 0x18)
>
> REG32(CXL_DEV_CMD_PAYLOAD, 0x20)
>
> +/* XXX: actually a 64b registers */
> +REG32(CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, 0)
> + FIELD(CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, FATAL, 0, 1)
> + FIELD(CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, FW_HALT, 1, 1)
> + FIELD(CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, MEDIA_STATUS, 2, 2)
> + FIELD(CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, MBOX_READY, 4, 1)
> + FIELD(CXL_MEM_DEV_STS, RESET_NEEDED, 5, 3)
> +
> #endif
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-16 16:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-11 5:46 [RFC PATCH 00/25] Introduce CXL 2.0 Emulation Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 01/25] Temp: Add the PCI_EXT_ID_DVSEC definition to the qemu pci_regs.h copy Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 02/25] hw/pci/cxl: Add a CXL component type (interface) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 03/25] hw/cxl/component: Introduce CXL components (8.1.x, 8.2.5) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 12:03 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 19:19 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-17 12:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-24 23:09 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 04/25] hw/cxl/device: Introduce a CXL device (8.2.8) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 13:07 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 21:11 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-17 14:21 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 05/25] hw/cxl/device: Implement the CAP array (8.2.8.1-2) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 13:11 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 18:08 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 06/25] hw/cxl/device: Add device status (8.2.8.3) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 13:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 21:18 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-17 14:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 07/25] hw/cxl/device: Implement basic mailbox (8.2.8.4) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 13:46 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 21:42 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 08/25] hw/cxl/device: Add memory devices (8.2.8.5) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 16:37 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2020-11-16 21:45 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-17 14:31 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 09/25] hw/pxb: Use a type for realizing expanders Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 10/25] hw/pci/cxl: Create a CXL bus type Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 11/25] hw/pxb: Allow creation of a CXL PXB (host bridge) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 16:44 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 22:01 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-17 14:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 12/25] acpi/pci: Consolidate host bridge setup Ben Widawsky
2020-11-12 17:46 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 16:45 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 13/25] hw/pci: Plumb _UID through host bridges Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 14/25] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 15/25] acpi/pxb/cxl: Reserve host bridge MMIO Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 16:54 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 16/25] hw/pxb/cxl: Add "windows" for host bridges Ben Widawsky
2020-11-13 0:49 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-23 19:12 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 17/25] hw/cxl/rp: Add a root port Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 18/25] hw/cxl/device: Add a memory device (8.2.8.5) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-12 18:37 ` Eric Blake
2020-11-13 7:47 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-11-25 16:53 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-26 6:36 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-11-30 17:07 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-12-01 17:06 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 19/25] hw/cxl/device: Implement MMIO HDM decoding (8.2.5.12) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 20/25] acpi/cxl: Add _OSC implementation (9.14.2) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 21/25] acpi/cxl: Introduce a compat-driver UUID for CXL _OSC Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 22/25] acpi/cxl: Create the CEDT (9.14.1) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 17:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 22:05 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 23/25] Temp: acpi/cxl: Add ACPI0017 (CEDT awareness) Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 24/25] WIP: i386/cxl: Initialize a host bridge Ben Widawsky
2020-11-11 5:47 ` [RFC PATCH 25/25] qtest/cxl: Add very basic sanity tests Ben Widawsky
2020-11-16 17:21 ` [RFC PATCH 00/25] Introduce CXL 2.0 Emulation Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-16 18:06 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-11-17 14:09 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-11-25 18:29 ` Ben Widawsky
2020-12-04 14:27 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
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=20201116163722.000079f4@Huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
/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).