RE: [PATCH v6 4/8] acpi: Refactor the source of host bridge and build tables for pxb

[miaoyubo <miaoyubo@huawei.com>]

Thanks so much for such a careful review!!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 10:01 PM
> To: miaoyubo <miaoyubo@huawei.com>
> Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org; shannon.zhaosl@gmail.com;
> lersek@redhat.com; imammedo@redhat.com; qemu-devel@nongnu.org;
> berrange@redhat.com; Xiexiangyou <xiexiangyou@huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] acpi: Refactor the source of host bridge and build
> tables for pxb
> 
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 08:58:12PM +0800, Yubo Miao wrote:
> > From: miaoyubo <miaoyubo@huawei.com>
> >
> > The resources of pxbs and obtained by crs_build and the resources used
> > by pxbs would be moved form the resources defined for host-bridge.
> >
> > The resources for pxb are composed of the bar space of the
> > pci-bridge/pcie-root-port behined it and the config space of devices
> > behind it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: miaoyubo <miaoyubo@huawei.com>
> 
> A bunch of spelling/syntax mistakes in the log, pls spellcheck.
> 
> Pls use the format
>  Yubo Miao <miaoyubo@huawei.com>
> 
> 
> 

Thanks for pointing out the mistakes!

> > ---
> >  hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 131
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 111 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c index
> > e8ba09855c..7bcd04dfb7 100644
> > --- a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > +++ b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > @@ -49,6 +49,9 @@
> >  #include "kvm_arm.h"
> >  #include "migration/vmstate.h"
> >
> > +#include "hw/arm/virt.h"
> > +#include "hw/pci/pci_bus.h"
> > +#include "hw/pci/pci_bridge.h"
> >  #define ARM_SPI_BASE 32
> >
> >  static void acpi_dsdt_add_cpus(Aml *scope, int smp_cpus) @@ -266,19
> > +269,81 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_pci_osc(Aml *dev, Aml *scope)  }
> >
> >  static void acpi_dsdt_add_pci(Aml *scope, const MemMapEntry
> *memmap,
> > -                              uint32_t irq, bool use_highmem, bool highmem_ecam)
> > +                              uint32_t irq, bool use_highmem, bool highmem_ecam,
> > +                              VirtMachineState *vms)
> >  {
> >      int ecam_id = VIRT_ECAM_ID(highmem_ecam);
> > -    Aml *method, *crs;
> > +    int i;
> > +    Aml *method, *crs, *dev;
> >      hwaddr base_mmio = memmap[VIRT_PCIE_MMIO].base;
> >      hwaddr size_mmio = memmap[VIRT_PCIE_MMIO].size;
> >      hwaddr base_pio = memmap[VIRT_PCIE_PIO].base;
> >      hwaddr size_pio = memmap[VIRT_PCIE_PIO].size;
> >      hwaddr base_ecam = memmap[ecam_id].base;
> >      hwaddr size_ecam = memmap[ecam_id].size;
> > +    CrsRangeEntry *entry;
> > +    CrsRangeSet crs_range_set;
> > +
> > +    crs_range_set_init(&crs_range_set);
> >      int nr_pcie_buses = size_ecam / PCIE_MMCFG_SIZE_MIN;
> > +    PCIHostState *s = OBJECT_CHECK(PCIHostState,
> > +                                   object_resolve_path_type("",
> > +                                   "pcie-host-bridge", NULL),
> > +                                   TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE);
> 
> Not TYPE_PCIE_HOST_BRIDGE? And what if it's ambiguous?
> 
> 

Yes, TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE is ambiguous, I would fix it.  

> > +
> > +    PCIBus *bus = s->bus;
> > +    /* start to construct the tables for pxb*/
> 
> 
> coding style violation. weird that ehckpatch didn't notice it.
> 

Thanks for such a careful review!

> > +    if (bus) {
> > +        QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) {
> > +            uint8_t bus_num = pci_bus_num(bus);
> > +            uint8_t numa_node = pci_bus_numa_node(bus);
> > +
> > +            if (!pci_bus_is_root(bus)) {
> > +                continue;
> > +            }
> > +            /*
> > +             * Coded up the MIN of the busNr defined for pxb-pcie,
> > +             * the MIN - 1 would be the MAX bus number for the main
> > +             * host bridge.
> 
> 
> Couldn't figure out this comment. Pls rephrase in some way so it's
> understandable.
> 

How about 
/* 0 - (nr_pcie_buses - 1) is the bus range for the main
  * host-bridge and it equals the MIN of the
  * busNr defined for pxb-pcie*/

> > +             */
> > +            if (bus_num < nr_pcie_buses) {
> > +                nr_pcie_buses = bus_num;
> > +            }
> > +
> > +            }
> > +
> > +            acpi_dsdt_add_pci_route_table(dev, scope, irq);
> > +
> > +            /*
> > +             * Resources deined for PXBs are composed by the folling parts:
> > +             * 1. The resources the pci-brige/pcie-root-port need.
> > +             * 2. The resources the devices behind pxb need.
> > +             */
> 
> 
> syntax/grammar errors here too.
> 

Sorry for the syntax error!

> > +            crs = build_crs(PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(BUS(bus)->parent),
> &crs_range_set);
> > +            aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_CRS", crs));
> > +
> > +            acpi_dsdt_add_pci_osc(dev, scope);
> > +
> > +            aml_append(scope, dev);
> > +
> > +        }
> > +    }
> >
> > -    Aml *dev = aml_device("%s", "PCI0");
> > +    /* start to construct the tables for main host bridge */
> 
> tables for the main.
> 
>
 
Yes, tables for the main is better.

> 
> > +    dev = aml_device("%s", "PCI0");
> 
> 
> Make dev above local in scope, then this can stay unchanged.
> 

Sure.

> >      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("PNP0A08")));
> >      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_CID", aml_string("PNP0A03")));
> >      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_SEG", aml_int(0))); @@ -299,25
> > +364,51 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_pci(Aml *scope, const
> MemMapEntry *memmap,
> >          aml_word_bus_number(AML_MIN_FIXED, AML_MAX_FIXED,
> AML_POS_DECODE,
> >                              0x0000, 0x0000, nr_pcie_buses - 1, 0x0000,
> >                              nr_pcie_buses));
> > -    aml_append(rbuf,
> > -        aml_dword_memory(AML_POS_DECODE, AML_MIN_FIXED,
> AML_MAX_FIXED,
> >      unsigned dsdt, xsdt;
> >      GArray *tables_blob = tables->table_data;
> >      MachineState *ms = MACHINE(vms);
> > -
> >      table_offsets = g_array_new(false, true /* clear */,
> >                                          sizeof(uint32_t));
> >
> 
> this empty line didn't hurt
> 

I would keep it.

> > @@ -952,7 +1044,6 @@ void virt_acpi_setup(VirtMachineState *vms)
> >      build_state->rsdp_mr = acpi_add_rom_blob(virt_acpi_build_update,
> >                                               build_state, tables.rsdp,
> >                                               ACPI_BUILD_RSDP_FILE,
> > 0);
> > -
> >      qemu_register_reset(virt_acpi_build_reset, build_state);
> >      virt_acpi_build_reset(build_state);
> >      vmstate_register(NULL, 0, &vmstate_virt_acpi_build, build_state);
> 
> 
> this line didn't hurt either.
> 

I would keep it

> > --
> > 2.19.1
> >

Regards,
Miao