From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] pci: Add pci_device_get_host_irq
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 17:15:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FC8DC9E.7060105@siemens.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120601143413.GA22754@redhat.com>
On 2012-06-01 16:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 03:57:01PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-06-01 15:27, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 02:52:56PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> On 2012-05-30 22:31, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>>>> So we'll just have PIIX_NUM_PIC_IRQS entries there and use
>>>>>>> irq_count instead of the pic_levels bitmap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just that this affects generic PCI code, not only PIIX-specific things.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes but it's not a problem - pci_bus_irqs sets the map function and nirqs.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And that we need to save/restore some irq_count field according to the
>>>>>> old semantics.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, it's a bug: this is redundant info we should not have exposed it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, let's make the rest work properly and cleanly first, add a FIXME
>>>>> for now, then we'll find a hack making it work for migration.
>>>>
>>>> It remains non-trivial: I got your patch working (a minor init issue),
>>>> but yet without changing the number of IRQs for PIIX3, so keeping the
>>>> irq_count semantics for this host bridge.
>>>>
>>>> Now I'm facing three possibilities of how to proceed:
>>>
>>> They all look OK I think :) Some comments below.
>>>
>>>> 1. Give up on the (currently broken) feature to write a vmstate for
>>>> older QEMU versions.
>>>>
>>>> This will allow to declare the irq_count field in vmstate_pcibus
>>>> unused, and we would have to restore it on vmload step-wise via the
>>>> PCI devices. It would also allow to change its semantics for PIIX3,
>>>> mapping directly to PIC IRQs.
>>>
>>> I think that's okay too simply because these things are usually
>>> easy to fix after the fact when the rest of the issues are addressed.
>>
>> Don't get what you mean with "fixed". If we fix the vmstate generation
>> in making it backward-compatible again, we enter option 2. Option 1 is
>> explicitly about giving this up.
>
> What I really mean is I think I see how 2 can be added without much
> pain. So let's focus on 1 for now and worst case we break migration.
I'd like to avoid planing for this worst case as long as there are also
statements [1] that this is not acceptable for QEMU in general. It
doesn't to create a beautiful architecture initially about which we
already know that it will become more complex than alternatives in the end.
>
>>>
>>>> 2. Keep writing a legacy irq_count field.
>>>>
>>>> This will require quite a few new APIs so that host bridges that
>>>> want to change their nirq can still generate a compatible irq_count
>>>> vmstate field. Namely:
>>>> - A function to set up vmstate_irq_count and define a callback that
>>>> the core will invoke to prepare the vmstate_irq_count before
>>>> vmsave.
>>>> - A function to obtain the IRQ mapping /without/ the final host
>>>> bridge step. This is required so that the callback above can
>>>> calculate the old state like in the PIIX3 case.
>>>
>>> Does this really need to be so complex? It seems that we just need
>>> pci_get_irq_count(bus, irq) which can use the existing map_irq API, no?
>>> Then invoke that before save.
>>
>> No, because the new map_irq of the PIIX3 bridge will also include the
>> host bridge routing (or masking) according to the PIRQx routoing
>> registers of the PIIX3. Moreover, the fixup of the written legacy
>> irq_count state has to happen in the PCI layer, which therefore has to
>> query the host bridge for fixup information, not the other way around
>> (because the PCI bus vmstate is separate from the PIIX3 host bridge).
>>
>>>
>>>> 3. Keep irq_count and nirq as is, introduce additional map_host_irq.
>>>>
>>>> This is simpler than 2 and more compatible than 1. It would also
>>>> allow to introduce the polarity and masking information more
>>>> smoothly as we won't have to add it to existing map_irq callbacks
>>>> then.
>>>
>>> So what does it map, and to what?
>>
>> PCI bus IRQ to *host* IRQ. It is supposed to explore the routing of the
>> host bridge between the root bus and the host's interrupt controller
>> (i.e. the step that is currently missing the cached chain).
>>
>>> Maybe we can make the name imply that somehow.
>>
>> Better suggestions for this handler and maybe also the existing map_irq
>> are welcome to make the difference clearer.
>>
>> Jan
>
> So I won't object to adding a new API but if we do
> it properly this won't help compatibility :(
It will as this API does not touch the parts that affect the vmstate
(ie. semantics of irq_count won't change).
>
> Let's formulate what these do exactly, this will
> also help us come up with sensible names.
>
> 1. The difference is that pci bridges route interrupt pins. So it gets
> interrupt pin on device and returns interrupt pin on connector. All
> attributes are standard PCI. We should remove all mentions of "irq"
> really.
>
>
> 2. The pci root (yes it's a host bridge but let's
> not use the term host if we can) routes
> an interrupt pin on device to a host irq. It can also
> do more things like invert polarity.
>
> So yes we can add 2 to piix but we really should
> remove 1 from it.
>
> Wrt names - do you object to long names?
> How about route_interrupt_pin for 1
> and route_interrupt_pin_to_irq for 2?
I'm fine with this.
Jan
[1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/153357
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-01 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4FC65910.4030908@siemens.com>
[not found] ` <20120530174125.GC32721@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <4FC65E19.6090203@siemens.com>
[not found] ` <4FC65F70.4040501@siemens.com>
[not found] ` <20120530182356.GD32721@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20120530182913.GE32721@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20120530185150.GA1546@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <4FC66FB1.9050306@siemens.com>
[not found] ` <20120530193034.GE1551@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <4FC681B4.3030807@web.de>
[not found] ` <20120530203119.GH1551@redhat.com>
2012-06-01 12:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] pci: Add pci_device_get_host_irq Jan Kiszka
2012-06-01 13:27 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 13:57 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-06-01 14:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 15:15 ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
2012-06-01 15:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 15:54 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-06-01 16:05 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 16:17 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-06-01 15:30 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 15:59 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-06-01 15:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 13:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-06-01 13:43 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-05-21 13:13 Jan Kiszka
2012-05-21 14:10 ` Alex Williamson
2012-05-21 14:36 ` Avi Kivity
2012-05-21 14:47 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-05-21 17:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-21 18:58 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-05-21 21:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-21 19:05 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-21 20:35 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-05-21 21:03 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=4FC8DC9E.7060105@siemens.com \
--to=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=mtosatti@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).