Re: [Qemu-devel] [big lock] Discussion about the convention of device's DMA each other after breaking down biglock

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 09/24/2012 10:32 AM, liu ping fan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 09/24/2012 08:33 AM, liu ping fan wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> > On 09/19/2012 12:34 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> What about the following:
>>> >>
>>> >> What we really need to support in practice is MMIO access triggers RAM
>>> >> access of device model. Scenarios where a device access triggers another
>>> >> MMIO access could likely just be rejected without causing troubles.
>>> >>
>>> >> So, when we dispatch a request to a device, we mark that the current
>>> >> thread is in a MMIO dispatch and reject any follow-up c_p_m_rw that does
>>> >> _not_ target RAM, ie. is another, nested MMIO request - independent of
>>> >> its destination. How much of the known issues would this solve? And what
>>> >> would remain open?
>>> >
>>> > Various iommu-like devices re-dispatch I/O, like changing endianness or
>>> > bitband.  I don't know whether it targets I/O rather than RAM.
>>> >
>>> Have not found the exact code. But I think the call chain may look
>>> like this: dev mmio-handler --> c_p_m_rw() --> iommu mmio-handler -->
>>> c_p_m_rw()
>>> And I think you worry about the case for "c_p_m_rw() --> iommu
>>> mmio-handler". Right? How about introduce an member can_nest for
>>> MemoryRegionOps of iommu's mr?
>>>
>>
>> I would rather push the iommu logic into the memory API:
>>
>>   memory_region_init_iommu(MemoryRegion *mr, const char *name,
>>                            MemoryRegion *target, MemoryRegionIOMMUOps *ops,
>>                            unsigned size)
>>
>>   struct MemoryRegionIOMMUOps {
>>       target_physical_addr_t (*translate)(target_physical_addr_t addr,
>> bool write);
>>       void (*fault)(target_physical_addr_t addr);
>>   };
>>
> So I guess, after introduce this, the code logic in c_p_m_rw() will
> look like this
> 
> c_p_m_rw(dev_virt_addr, ...)
> {
>    mr = phys_page_lookup();
>    if (mr->iommu_ops)
>        real_addr = translate(dev_virt_addr,..)；
> 
>    ptr = qemu_get_ram_ptr(real_addr);
>    memcpy(buf, ptr, sz);
> }
> 

Something like that.  It will be a while loop, to allow for iommus
strung in series.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function