From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To: Joby Poriyath <joby.poriyath@citrix.com>, zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com
Cc: keir@xen.org, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, JBeulich@suse.com,
malcolm.crossley@citrix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] interrupts: allow guest to set and clear MSI-X mask bit
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:23:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130719152326.GB13009@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130719150726.GA25302@citrix.com>
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 04:07:37PM +0100, Joby Poriyath wrote:
> Guest needs the ability to enable and disable MSI-X interrupts
> by setting the MSI-X control bit. Currently, a write to MSI-X
> mask bit by the guest is silently ignored.
>
> A likely scenario is where we have a 82599 SR-IOV nic passed
> through to a guest. From the guest if you do
>
> ifconfig <ETH_DEV> down
> ifconfig <ETH_DEV> up
>
> the interrupts remain masked. The the mask bit for the VF is
> being set by the PF performing a reset (at the request of the VF).
> However, interrupts are enabled by VF driver by clearing the mask
> bit by writing directly to BAR3 region containing the MSI-X table.
>
> From dom0, we can verify that
> interrupts are being masked using 'xl debug-keys M'.
>
> Initially, guest was allowed to modify MSI-X bit.
> Later this behaviour was changed.
> See changeset 74c213c506afcd74a8556dd092995fd4dc38b225.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joby Poriyath <joby.poriyath@citrix.com>
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c
> index 36de312..97d9f93 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c
> @@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ struct msixtbl_entry
> uint32_t msi_ad[3]; /* Shadow of address low, high and data */
> } gentries[MAX_MSIX_ACC_ENTRIES];
> struct rcu_head rcu;
> + struct pirq *pirq;
> };
>
> static DEFINE_RCU_READ_LOCK(msixtbl_rcu_lock);
> @@ -254,6 +255,9 @@ static int msixtbl_write(struct vcpu *v, unsigned long address,
> void *virt;
> unsigned int nr_entry, index;
> int r = X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + struct irq_desc *desc;
> + unsigned long orig;
>
> if ( len != 4 || (address & 3) )
> return r;
> @@ -283,20 +287,20 @@ static int msixtbl_write(struct vcpu *v, unsigned long address,
> if ( !virt )
> goto out;
>
> - /* Do not allow the mask bit to be changed. */
> -#if 0 /* XXX
> - * As the mask bit is the only defined bit in the word, and as the
> - * host MSI-X code doesn't preserve the other bits anyway, doing
> - * this is pointless. So for now just discard the write (also
> - * saving us from having to determine the matching irq_desc).
> - */
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&desc->lock, flags);
> + desc = pirq_spin_lock_irq_desc(entry->pirq, &flags);
> + if ( !desc )
> + goto out;
> +
> + /* The mask bit is the only defined bit in the word. But we
> + * ought to preserve the reserved bits. Clearing the reserved
> + * bits can result in undefined behaviour (see PCI Local Bus
> + * Specification revision 2.3).
So.. if we do it won't that be potentially dangerous?
> + */
> orig = readl(virt);
> - val &= ~PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK;
> - val |= orig & PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK;
> + val &= PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK;
> + val |= ( orig & ~PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK );
> writel(val, virt);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
> -#endif
>
> r = X86EMUL_OKAY;
> out:
> @@ -328,7 +332,8 @@ const struct hvm_mmio_handler msixtbl_mmio_handler = {
> static void add_msixtbl_entry(struct domain *d,
> struct pci_dev *pdev,
> uint64_t gtable,
> - struct msixtbl_entry *entry)
> + struct msixtbl_entry *entry,
> + struct pirq *pirq)
> {
> u32 len;
>
> @@ -342,6 +347,7 @@ static void add_msixtbl_entry(struct domain *d,
> entry->table_len = len;
> entry->pdev = pdev;
> entry->gtable = (unsigned long) gtable;
> + entry->pirq = pirq;
>
> list_add_rcu(&entry->list, &d->arch.hvm_domain.msixtbl_list);
> }
> @@ -404,7 +410,7 @@ int msixtbl_pt_register(struct domain *d, struct pirq *pirq, uint64_t gtable)
>
> entry = new_entry;
> new_entry = NULL;
> - add_msixtbl_entry(d, pdev, gtable, entry);
> + add_msixtbl_entry(d, pdev, gtable, entry, pirq);
>
> found:
> atomic_inc(&entry->refcnt);
> --
> 1.7.10.4
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-19 15:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-19 15:07 [PATCH v2] interrupts: allow guest to set and clear MSI-X mask bit Joby Poriyath
2013-07-19 15:23 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2013-07-19 16:07 ` Joby Poriyath
2013-07-19 16:38 ` Malcolm Crossley
2013-07-23 10:54 ` Joby Poriyath
2013-07-23 13:21 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-07-23 13:28 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-07-23 17:59 ` Joby Poriyath
2013-08-05 10:44 ` Jan Beulich
2013-08-05 11:01 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-08-05 11:49 ` Jan Beulich
2013-08-05 16:03 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-08-06 8:29 ` Jan Beulich
2013-08-06 9:52 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-08-06 10:17 ` Jan Beulich
2013-08-06 10:17 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2013-08-06 13:11 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2013-08-13 17:37 ` Joby Poriyath
2013-08-14 10:11 ` Jan Beulich
2013-08-13 17:08 ` Joby Poriyath
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=20130719152326.GB13009@localhost.localdomain \
--to=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=joby.poriyath@citrix.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=malcolm.crossley@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
--cc=zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com \
/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).