virtualization.lists.linux-foundation.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>,
	Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>,
	Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:42:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190410104251.38fe7405.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190404231622.52531-8-pasic@linux.ibm.com>

On Fri,  5 Apr 2019 01:16:17 +0200
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of
> memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to
> change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these
> pieces of memory.
> 
> Let us make sure all ccw I/O is done through shared memory.
> 
> Note: The control blocks of I/O instructions do not need to be shared.
> These are marshalled by the ultravisor.

Ok, so direct parameters of I/O instructions are handled by the
ultravisor?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 177 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 107 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)
> 
(...)
> @@ -167,6 +170,28 @@ static struct virtio_ccw_device *to_vc_device(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>  	return container_of(vdev, struct virtio_ccw_device, vdev);
>  }
>  
> +#define vc_dma_decl_struct(type, field) \
> +	dma_addr_t field ## _dma_addr;  \
> +	struct type *field
> +
> +static inline void *__vc_dma_alloc(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size,
> +				   dma_addr_t *dma_handle)
> +{
> +	return dma_alloc_coherent(vdev->dev.parent, size, dma_handle,
> +				  GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void __vc_dma_free(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size,
> +				 void *cpu_addr, dma_addr_t dma_handle)
> +{
> +	dma_free_coherent(vdev->dev.parent, size, cpu_addr, dma_handle);
> +}
> +
> +#define vc_dma_alloc_struct(vdev, ptr) \
> +	({ ptr = __vc_dma_alloc(vdev, (sizeof(*(ptr))), &(ptr ## _dma_addr)); })
> +#define vc_dma_free_struct(vdev, ptr) \
> +	__vc_dma_free(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr)), (ptr), (ptr ## _dma_addr))

Not sure I'm a fan of those wrappers... I think they actually hurt
readability of the code.

> +
>  static void drop_airq_indicator(struct virtqueue *vq, struct airq_info *info)
>  {
>  	unsigned long i, flags;
> @@ -322,12 +347,12 @@ static void virtio_ccw_drop_indicator(struct virtio_ccw_device *vcdev,
>  {
>  	int ret;
>  	unsigned long *indicatorp = NULL;
> -	struct virtio_thinint_area *thinint_area = NULL;
> +	vc_dma_decl_struct(virtio_thinint_area, thinint_area) = NULL;
> +	dma_addr_t indicatorp_dma_addr;
>  	struct airq_info *airq_info = vcdev->airq_info;
>  
>  	if (vcdev->is_thinint) {
> -		thinint_area = kzalloc(sizeof(*thinint_area),
> -				       GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
> +		vc_dma_alloc_struct(&vcdev->vdev, thinint_area);
>  		if (!thinint_area)
>  			return;
>  		thinint_area->summary_indicator =
> @@ -338,8 +363,9 @@ static void virtio_ccw_drop_indicator(struct virtio_ccw_device *vcdev,
>  		ccw->cda = (__u32)(unsigned long) thinint_area;
>  	} else {
>  		/* payload is the address of the indicators */
> -		indicatorp = kmalloc(sizeof(&vcdev->indicators),
> -				     GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
> +		indicatorp = __vc_dma_alloc(&vcdev->vdev,
> +					    sizeof(&vcdev->indicators),
> +					    &indicatorp_dma_addr);
>  		if (!indicatorp)
>  			return;
>  		*indicatorp = 0;
> @@ -359,8 +385,10 @@ static void virtio_ccw_drop_indicator(struct virtio_ccw_device *vcdev,
>  			 "Failed to deregister indicators (%d)\n", ret);
>  	else if (vcdev->is_thinint)
>  		virtio_ccw_drop_indicators(vcdev);
> -	kfree(indicatorp);
> -	kfree(thinint_area);
> +	if (indicatorp)
> +		__vc_dma_free(&vcdev->vdev, sizeof(&vcdev->indicators),
> +			       indicatorp, indicatorp_dma_addr);
> +	vc_dma_free_struct(&vcdev->vdev, thinint_area);

Don't you need to check for !NULL here as well?

>  }
>  
>  static inline long __do_kvm_notify(struct subchannel_id schid,
(...)
> @@ -1280,7 +1318,6 @@ static int virtio_ccw_online(struct ccw_device *cdev)
>  
>  	vcdev->is_thinint = virtio_ccw_use_airq; /* at least try */
>  
> -	vcdev->vdev.dev.parent = &cdev->dev;

Hm?

(You added a line like that in a previous patch; should it simply have
been a movement instead? Or am I misremembering?)

>  	vcdev->vdev.dev.release = virtio_ccw_release_dev;
>  	vcdev->vdev.config = &virtio_ccw_config_ops;
>  	vcdev->cdev = cdev;

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-04-10  8:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20190404231622.52531-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-2-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-08 11:01   ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] virtio/s390: use vring_create_virtqueue Cornelia Huck
2019-04-08 12:37     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-3-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09  9:57   ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw Cornelia Huck
     [not found]     ` <20190409132927.5df3bc50@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 13:01       ` Cornelia Huck
     [not found]         ` <20190409152313.0296e8f1@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 15:47           ` Cornelia Huck
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-4-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 10:16   ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization Cornelia Huck
     [not found]     ` <20190409125416.73713f23@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 17:18       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 12:22   ` Christoph Hellwig
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-5-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 10:44   ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] s390/cio: introduce cio DMA pool Cornelia Huck
     [not found]     ` <20190409141114.7dcce94a@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 17:14       ` Cornelia Huck
     [not found]         ` <20190410173148.067555dc@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:07           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11 18:25   ` Sebastian Ott
     [not found]     ` <20190412132010.3c74cb63@oc2783563651>
2019-04-12 12:12       ` Sebastian Ott
     [not found]         ` <20190412173017.04b768bb@oc2783563651>
2019-04-16 12:50           ` Sebastian Ott
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-6-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 17:55   ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] s390/cio: add protected virtualization support to cio Cornelia Huck
     [not found]     ` <20190410021044.4da3e847@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10  8:25       ` Cornelia Huck
     [not found]         ` <20190410150225.61b86cd9@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:16           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11 14:15   ` Sebastian Ott
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-8-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-10  8:42   ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
     [not found]     ` <20190410164245.53f8b26d@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:21       ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O Cornelia Huck
     [not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-11-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-10  8:46   ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] virtio/s390: consolidate DMA allocations Cornelia Huck
     [not found]     ` <20190410171254.71206015@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:36       ` Cornelia Huck
     [not found]         ` <20190410194849.511ecc46@oc2783563651>
2019-04-11  9:24           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10  9:20 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization Cornelia Huck
     [not found]   ` <20190410175750.0ed0a454@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:24     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-12 13:47 ` David Hildenbrand
     [not found]   ` <20190416131005.6f3e05eb@oc2783563651>
2019-04-16 11:50     ` David Hildenbrand

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=20190410104251.38fe7405.cohuck@redhat.com \
    --to=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mihajlov@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=sebott@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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).