From: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: "qemu-arm@nongnu.org" <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"eric.auger@redhat.com" <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
"peter.maydell@linaro.org" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
"jgg@nvidia.com" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
"ddutile@redhat.com" <ddutile@redhat.com>,
"berrange@redhat.com" <berrange@redhat.com>,
"imammedo@redhat.com" <imammedo@redhat.com>,
"nathanc@nvidia.com" <nathanc@nvidia.com>,
"mochs@nvidia.com" <mochs@nvidia.com>,
"smostafa@google.com" <smostafa@google.com>,
"gustavo.romero@linaro.org" <gustavo.romero@linaro.org>,
"mst@redhat.com" <mst@redhat.com>,
"marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com" <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
"Wangzhou (B)" <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>,
jiangkunkun <jiangkunkun@huawei.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>,
"zhangfei.gao@linaro.org" <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 02/12] hw/arm/smmu-common: Check SMMU has PCIe Root Complex association
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 07:27:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <88a55d63d54f4586bd9992b6bdff5729@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aG8BKexuSHtSvySv@Asurada-Nvidia>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2025 12:54 AM
> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
> Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org; qemu-devel@nongnu.org;
> eric.auger@redhat.com; peter.maydell@linaro.org; jgg@nvidia.com;
> ddutile@redhat.com; berrange@redhat.com; imammedo@redhat.com;
> nathanc@nvidia.com; mochs@nvidia.com; smostafa@google.com;
> gustavo.romero@linaro.org; mst@redhat.com;
> marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com; Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>;
> Wangzhou (B) <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>; jiangkunkun
> <jiangkunkun@huawei.com>; Jonathan Cameron
> <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>; zhangfei.gao@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/12] hw/arm/smmu-common: Check SMMU has
> PCIe Root Complex association
>
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 08:08:49AM +0000, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 04:40:45PM +0100, Shameer Kolothum wrote:
> > > > @@ -937,11 +939,32 @@ static void smmu_base_realize(DeviceState
> > > *dev, Error **errp)
> > > > g_free, g_free);
> > > > s->smmu_pcibus_by_busptr = g_hash_table_new(NULL, NULL);
> > >
> > > Although this is not introduced by this patch, is there a
> > > g_hash_table_remove() somewhere in the code?
> >
> > g_hash_table_remove() is to remove a key/value pair, isn't it?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Or you meant
> > a corresponding free in case of failure here?
>
> Yes. But I saw the other two g_hash_table_new_full calls were not
> reverted in the exit path either. Then I saw smmu_base_reset_exit
> does the clean up of those two but not this smmu_pcibus_by_busptr.
Ok. I think that is by design. The insert for busptr cache happens during
early stages of Qemu through get_address_space() callback and
smmu_base_reset_exit() is called after that, just before the Guest boot.
So if you clean that cache at that time , you need to handle it differently
at a later stage. Also I don't think it makes much sense to clear busptr
before the Guest boot as it is not going to become stale unlike configs
and iotlb.
> > It's a realize() fn and errp is set
> > if something goes wrong and QEMU will exit. Not sure we need an explicit
> > free here.
> >
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * We only allow default PCIe Root Complex(pcie.0) or pxb-pcie
> based
> > > extra
> > > > + * root complexes to be associated with SMMU.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (pci_bus_is_express(pci_bus) && pci_bus_is_root(pci_bus) &&
> > > > + object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pci_bus)->parent,
> > > TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE)) {
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * For pxb-pcie, parent_dev will be set. Make sure it is
> > > > + * pxb-pcie indeed.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (pci_bus->parent_dev) {
> > > > + if (!object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pci_bus),
> TYPE_PXB_PCIE_BUS)) {
> > >
> > > The pci_bus_is_express(pci_bus) at the top is equivalent to:
> > > object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pci_bus), TYPE_PCIE_BUS)
> > > Then here it is doing:
> > > object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pci_bus), TYPE_PXB_PCIE_BUS)
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Hmm?
>
> We have these two types defined as two different strings, right?
>
> #define TYPE_PCIE_BUS "PCIE"
> #define TYPE_PXB_PCIE_BUS "pxb-pcie-bus"
>
> So the first test is to make sure pci_bus string is "PCIE",
> then the second one testing the same pci_bus string will
> never be true?
>
It will be true.
static const TypeInfo pxb_pcie_bus_info = {
.name = TYPE_PXB_PCIE_BUS,
.parent = TYPE_PCIE_BUS,
.instance_size = sizeof(PXBBus),
.class_init = pxb_bus_class_init,
};
TYPE_PXB_PCIE_BUS has a parent TYPE_PCIE_BUS. And the function
object_dynamic_cast() does the magic. It will return non-null for an
exact object type and also for its parents in the QOM hierarchy.
> > > So, this checks the same pci_bus but expects two different types?
>
> > In QEMU, we can have three types of PCIe root complexes to be specified
> for
> > virt machine.
> >
> > 1. default pcie.0 (TYPE_GPEX_HOST --> TYPE_PCIE_HOST_BRIDGE -->
> TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE)
> > 2. pxb-pcie (TYPE_PXB_HOST -->TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE)
> > 2. pxb-cxl (TYPE_PXB_CXL_HOST --> TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE)
> >
> > The above first check is to see whether the bus is PCIE && root bus &&
> parent
> > of type TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE. This will identify all the above three
> cases.
> >
> > Both pxb-pcie and pxb-cxl are special extra root complexes based on PCI
> > expansion bridges and has a parent_dev set(both has pcie.0 has parent
> bus).
> >
> > Hence we check to see parent_dev is set and make sure it is indeed
> > TYPE_PXB_PCIE_BUS to avoid attaching to pxb-cxl.
>
> I see. That's clear now. I think it'd help by writing:
> /*
> * While pcie.0 doesn't set the parent_dev, either pxb-pcie
> or
> * pxb-cxl does. Re-test the type to make sure it is pxb-pcie.
> */
I think it is already captured in the comments in this patch.
Thanks,
Shameer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-10 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-08 15:40 [PATCH v7 00/12] hw/arm/virt: Add support for user creatable SMMUv3 device Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 01/12] hw/arm/virt-acpi-build: Don't create ITS id mappings by default Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-10 13:59 ` Eric Auger
2025-07-10 15:20 ` Peter Maydell
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 02/12] hw/arm/smmu-common: Check SMMU has PCIe Root Complex association Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 20:57 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-09 8:08 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via
2025-07-09 23:54 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-10 7:27 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via [this message]
2025-07-10 17:02 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-10 17:07 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 03/12] hw/arm/virt-acpi-build: Re-arrange SMMUv3 IORT build Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 04/12] hw/arm/virt-acpi-build: Update IORT for multiple smmuv3 devices Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 05/12] hw/arm/virt: Factor out common SMMUV3 dt bindings code Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 06/12] hw/arm/virt: Add an SMMU_IO_LEN macro Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 07/12] hw/pci: Introduce pci_setup_iommu_per_bus() for per-bus IOMMU ops retrieval Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 21:26 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-09 8:20 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via
2025-07-10 0:06 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-10 7:37 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via
2025-07-10 15:59 ` Donald Dutile
2025-07-10 16:21 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via
2025-07-10 16:55 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-10 21:40 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via
2025-07-10 22:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-10 16:58 ` Donald Dutile
2025-07-10 22:59 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 08/12] hw/arm/virt: Allow user-creatable SMMUv3 dev instantiation Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 21:34 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 09/12] qemu-options.hx: Document the arm-smmuv3 device Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 10/12] bios-tables-test: Allow for smmuv3 test data Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 11/12] qtest/bios-tables-test: Add tests for legacy smmuv3 and smmuv3 device Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-08 15:40 ` [PATCH v7 12/12] qtest/bios-tables-test: Update tables for smmuv3 tests Shameer Kolothum via
2025-07-10 10:10 ` [PATCH v7 00/12] hw/arm/virt: Add support for user creatable SMMUv3 device Shameerali Kolothum Thodi via
2025-07-10 11:48 ` Peter Maydell
2025-07-10 23:04 ` Nicolin Chen
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=88a55d63d54f4586bd9992b6bdff5729@huawei.com \
--to=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=ddutile@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=gustavo.romero@linaro.org \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jiangkunkun@huawei.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
--cc=mochs@nvidia.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=nathanc@nvidia.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
--cc=zhangfei.gao@linaro.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).