xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
To: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	stefano stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	wei liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	george dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
	ian jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, tim deegan <tim@xen.org>,
	xen-devel@lists.xen.org, jan beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
	andrew cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v6] vt-d: fix vf of rc integrated pf matched to wrong vt-d unit
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:50:51 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170816085047.GA7254@skl-2s3.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170816081746.ovf2yca4vo2bpeig@MacBook-Pro-de-Roger.local>

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 09:17:46AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>on wed, aug 16, 2017 at 01:12:24pm +0800, chao gao wrote:
>> the problem is for a vf of rc integrated pf (e.g. pf's bdf is
>> 00:02.0), we would wrongly use 00:00.0 to search vt-d unit.
>> 
>> if a pf is an extended function, the bdf of a traditional function
>> within the same device should be used to search vt-d unit. otherwise,
>> the real bdf of pf should be used. according pci-e spec, an extended
>> function is a function within an ari device and function number is
>> greater than 7.
>
>AFAIK, extended functions simply remove the slot and extend the
>function number to [0, 255], so it seems correct to expect that the
>VT-d unit search should be done using the bus and extended function
>parameters, and assume slot is 0. Is this some kind of limitation of
>VT-d?

VT-d spec makes such provision for VT-d unit search without any
explaination. But I think it isn't. Whether we can find the right VT-d unit
depends on DMAR. So I would rather regard it as firmware doesn't prepare
entries for extended functions in DMAR.

>
>> The original code tried to tell apart Extended
>> Function and non-Extended Function through checking PCI_SLOT(),
>> missing counterpart of pci_ari_enabled() (this function exists in
>> linux kernel) compared to linux kernel. Without checking whether ARI
>> is enabled, it incurs a RC integrated PF with PCI_SLOT() >0 is wrongly
>> classified to an extended function. Note that a RC integrated function
>> isn't within an ARI device and thus cannot be extended function and in
>> this case the real BDF should be used.
>> 
>> This patch introduces a new field, pf_is_extfn, in struct
>> pci_dev_info, to indicate whether the physical function is an extended
>> function. The new field helps to generate correct BDF to search VT-d
>> unit.
>
>[...]
>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/pci.h b/xen/include/xen/pci.h
>> index 59b6e8a..9e76aa0 100644
>> --- a/xen/include/xen/pci.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/pci.h
>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
>>  
>>  struct pci_dev_info {
>>      bool_t is_extfn;
>> +    bool_t pf_is_extfn; /* Only valid for virtual function */
>
>Can't you just re-use is_virtfn and is_extfn, and when both are true
>it means the pf where this vf belongs is an extended function?

Yes. Reuse vf's is_extfn field is possible.

Thanks
Chao

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-16  8:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-16  5:12 [PATCH v6] VT-d: fix VF of RC integrated PF matched to wrong VT-d unit Chao Gao
2017-08-16  8:17 ` [patch v6] vt-d: fix vf of rc integrated pf matched to wrong vt-d unit Roger Pau Monné
2017-08-16  8:50   ` Chao Gao [this message]
2017-08-16  9:10     ` Roger Pau Monné
2017-08-17  7:43 ` [PATCH v6] VT-d: fix VF of RC integrated PF matched to wrong VT-d unit Tian, Kevin
2017-08-22  5:03   ` Chao Gao

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=20170816085047.GA7254@skl-2s3.sh.intel.com \
    --to=chao.gao@intel.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=tim@xen.org \
    --cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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).