From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>
To: "Manish Jaggi" <mjaggi@caviumnetworks.com>,
"Xen Devel" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
"Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
"★ Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
"Manish Jaggi,★ Kumar, Vijaya" <Vijaya.Kumar@caviumnetworks.com>,
"Julien Grall" <julien.grall@linaro.org>,
"Ian Campbell" <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: "Prasun.kapoor@cavium.com" <Prasun.kapoor@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: PCI Pass-through in Xen ARM: Draft 4
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 02:12:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55F0D8FC.7050606@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55CC668F.80104@caviumnetworks.com>
Hi Manish,
On 13/08/2015 10:42, Manish Jaggi wrote:
> 3.2. Mapping between streamID - deviceID - pci sbdf - requesterID
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For a simpler case all should be equal to BDF. But there are some devices
> that use the wrong requester ID for DMA transactions. Linux kernel has
> PCI
> quirks for these. How the same be implemented in Xen or a diffrent
> approach
> has to be taken is TODO here.
>
> Till that time, for basic implementation it is assumed that all are equal
> to BDF.
Back to this streamID = DeviceID = requestID = SBDF again...
I've just found a patch for Linux send by one of your colleague about
tweaking the requesterID for thunder-X board (See [1]). The most
interesting bits are:
static u32 pci_requester_id_ecam(struct pci_dev *dev)
{
return (((pci_domain_nr(dev->bus) >> 2) << 19) |
((pci_domain_nr(dev->bus) % 4) << 16) |
(dev->bus->number << 8) | dev->devfn);
}
static u32 thunder_pci_requester_id(struct pci_dev *dev, u16 alias)
{
int ret;
ret = thunder_pem_requester_id(dev);
if (ret >= 0)
return (u32)ret;
return pci_requester_id_ecam(dev);
}
Which is then used to override the default function used by ITS to find
the deviceID.
AFAICT, this means that you can't safely assume that DeviceID == sBDF
even for your platform. Is that right?
If so, I'm afraid that you have to handle DeviceID != sBDF (and so on)
in your design doc. I.e how do you plan to get the base requester ID.
I can see 2 different solutions:
1) Let DOM0 pass the first requester ID when registering the bus
Pros:
* Less per-platform code in Xen
Cons:
* Assume that the requester ID are contiguous. (Is it really a cons?)
* Still require quirk for buggy device (i.e requester ID not correct)
2) Do it in Xen
Pros:
* We are not relying on DOM0 giving the requester ID
=> Not assuming contiguous requester ID
Cons:
* Per PCI bridge code to handle the mapping
Regards,
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/15/703
--
Julien Grall
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-10 1:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-13 9:42 PCI Pass-through in Xen ARM: Draft 4 Manish Jaggi
2015-08-13 10:37 ` Julien Grall
2015-09-02 15:19 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-02 15:40 ` Julien Grall
2015-08-13 15:29 ` Jan Beulich
2015-08-13 17:01 ` Ian Campbell
2015-08-14 9:26 ` Jan Beulich
2015-08-14 13:21 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-08-14 13:58 ` Jan Beulich
2015-08-14 14:03 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-08-14 14:34 ` Jan Beulich
2015-08-14 14:37 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-08-14 14:45 ` Julien Grall
2015-08-14 15:15 ` Jan Beulich
2015-08-14 15:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-02 14:45 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-02 14:52 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-02 15:07 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-02 14:47 ` Ian Campbell
2015-08-14 15:38 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-08-14 18:58 ` Jaggi, Manish
2015-08-16 23:59 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-02 14:57 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-02 15:06 ` Jan Beulich
2015-08-31 12:36 ` Manish Jaggi
2015-09-01 7:32 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-02 12:08 ` Manish Jaggi
2015-09-02 12:59 ` Julien Grall
2015-09-02 13:46 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-02 15:03 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-02 15:03 ` Ian Campbell
2015-09-01 16:15 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-09-10 1:12 ` Julien Grall [this message]
2015-09-15 18:58 ` Jaggi, Manish
2015-09-15 21:18 ` David Daney
2015-09-16 12:58 ` Julien Grall
2015-09-19 20:24 ` Manish Jaggi
2015-09-19 20:48 ` Julien Grall
2015-09-19 21:51 ` Daney, David
2015-09-21 10:17 ` Julien Grall
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=55F0D8FC.7050606@citrix.com \
--to=julien.grall@citrix.com \
--cc=Prasun.kapoor@cavium.com \
--cc=Vijaya.Kumar@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=julien.grall@linaro.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=mjaggi@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.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).