Re: [PATCH 4/4] hvmloader: add support to load extra ACPI tables from qemu

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:25:08AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> 
> 
> On 01/20/2016 11:47 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:29:55PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>On 01/20/2016 07:20 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>>>On 20.01.16 at 12:04, <haozhong.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>On 01/20/16 01:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>On 20.01.16 at 06:31, <haozhong.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>Secondly, the driver implements a convenient block device interface to
> >>>>>>let software access areas where NVDIMM devices are mapped. The
> >>>>>>existing vNVDIMM implementation in QEMU uses this interface.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As Linux NVDIMM driver has already done above, why do we bother to
> >>>>>>reimplement them in Xen?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>See above; a possibility is that we may need a split model (block
> >>>>>layer parts on Dom0, "normal memory" parts in the hypervisor.
> >>>>>Iirc the split is being determined by firmware, and hence set in
> >>>>>stone by the time OS (or hypervisor) boot starts.
> >>>>
> >>>>For the "normal memory" parts, do you mean parts that map the host
> >>>>NVDIMM device's address space range to the guest? I'm going to
> >>>>implement that part in hypervisor and expose it as a hypercall so that
> >>>>it can be used by QEMU.
> >>>
> >>>To answer this I need to have my understanding of the partitioning
> >>>being done by firmware confirmed: If that's the case, then "normal"
> >>>means the part that doesn't get exposed as a block device (SSD).
> >>>In any event there's no correlation to guest exposure here.
> >>
> >>Firmware does not manage NVDIMM. All the operations of nvdimm are handled
> >>by OS.
> >>
> >>Actually, there are lots of things we should take into account if we move
> >>the NVDIMM management to hypervisor:
> >
> >If you remove the block device part and just deal with pmem part then this
> >gets smaller.
> >
> 
> Yes indeed. But xen can not benefit from NVDIMM BLK, i think it is not a long
> time plan. :)
> 
> >Also the _DSM operations - I can't see them being in hypervisor - but only
> >in the dom0 - which would have the right software to tickle the correct
> >ioctl on /dev/pmem to do the "management" (carve the NVDIMM, perform
> >an SMART operation, etc).
> 
> Yes, it is reasonable to put it in dom 0 and it makes management tools happy.
> 
> >
> >>a) ACPI NFIT interpretation
> >>    A new ACPI table introduced in ACPI 6.0 is named NFIT which exports the
> >>    base information of NVDIMM devices which includes PMEM info, PBLK
> >>    info, nvdimm device interleave, vendor info, etc. Let me explain it one
> >>    by one.
> >
> >And it is a static table. As in part of the MADT.
> 
> Yes, it is, but we need to fetch updated nvdimm info from _FIT in SSDT/DSDT instead
> if a nvdimm device is hotpluged, please see below.
> 
> >>
> >>    PMEM and PBLK are two modes to access NVDIMM devices:
> >>    1) PMEM can be treated as NV-RAM which is directly mapped to CPU's address
> >>       space so that CPU can r/w it directly.
> >>    2) as NVDIMM has huge capability and CPU's address space is limited, NVDIMM
> >>       only offers two windows which are mapped to CPU's address space, the data
> >>       window and access window, so that CPU can use these two windows to access
> >>       the whole NVDIMM device.
> >>
> >>    NVDIMM device is interleaved whose info is also exported so that we can
> >>    calculate the address to access the specified NVDIMM device.
> >
> >Right, along with the serial numbers.
> >>
> >>    NVDIMM devices from different vendor can have different function so that the
> >>    vendor info is exported by NFIT to make vendor's driver work.
> >
> >via _DSM right?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >>
> >>b) ACPI SSDT interpretation
> >>    SSDT offers _DSM method which controls NVDIMM device, such as label operation,
> >>    health check etc and hotplug support.
> >
> >Sounds like the control domain (dom0) would be in charge of that.
> 
> Yup. Dom0 is a better place to handle it.
> 
> >>
> >>c) Resource management
> >>    NVDIMM resource management challenged as:
> >>    1) PMEM is huge and it is little slower access than RAM so it is not suitable
> >>       to manage it as page struct (i think it is not a big problem in Xen
> >>       hypervisor?)
> >>    2) need to partition it to it be used in multiple VMs.
> >>    3) need to support PBLK and partition it in the future.
> >
> >That all sounds to me like an control domain (dom0) decisions. Not Xen hypervisor.
> 
> Sure, so let dom0 handle this is better, we are on the same page. :)
> 
> >>
> >>d) management tools support
> >>    S.M.A.R.T? error detection and recovering?
> >>
> >>c) hotplug support
> >
> >How does that work? Ah the _DSM will point to the new ACPI NFIT for the OS
> >to scan. That would require the hypervisor also reading this for it to
> >update it's data-structures.
> 
> Similar as you said. The NVDIMM root device in SSDT/DSDT dedicates a new interface,
> _FIT, which return the new NFIT once new device hotplugged. And yes, domain 0 is
> the better place handing this case too.

That one is a bit difficult. Both the OS and the hypervisor would need to know about
this (I think?). dom0 since it gets the ACPI event and needs to process it. Then
the hypervisor needs to be told so it can slurp it up.

However I don't know if the hypervisor needs to know all the details of an
NVDIMM - or just the starting and ending ranges so that when an guest is created
and the VT-d is constructed - it can be assured that the ranges are valid.

I am not an expert on the P2M code - but I think that would need to be looked
at to make sure it is OK with stitching an E820_NVDIMM type "MFN" into an guest PFN.

> 
> >>
> >>d) third parts drivers
> >>    Vendor drivers need to be ported to xen hypervisor and let it be supported in
> >>    the management tool.
> >
> >Ewww.
> >
> >I presume the 'third party drivers' mean more interesting _DSM features right?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >On the base level the firmware with this type of NVDIMM would still have
> >the basic - ACPI NFIT + E820_NVDIMM (optional).
> >>
> 
> Yes.