Hi,
On 04/04/2019 14:45, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 08:36:06 +0000
> Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> The dynamic ioport allocation with IOPORT_EMPTY is currently only used
>> by PCI devices. Other devices use fixed ports for which they request
>> registration to the ioport API.
>>
>> PCI ports need to be in the PCI IO space and there is no reason ioport
>> API should know a PCI port is being allocated and needs to be placed in
>> PCI IO space. This currently just happens to be the case.
>>
>> Move the responsability of dynamic allocation of ioports from the ioport
>> API to PCI.
>>
>> In the future, if other types of devices also need dynamic ioport
>> allocation, they'll have to figure out the range of ports they are
>> allowed to use.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> hw/pci-shmem.c | 3 ++-
>> hw/vesa.c | 4 ++--
>> include/kvm/ioport.h | 3 ---
>> include/kvm/pci.h | 2 ++
>> ioport.c | 18 ------------------
>> pci.c | 8 ++++++++
>> vfio/core.c | 6 ++++--
>> virtio/pci.c | 3 ++-
>> 8 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/pci-shmem.c b/hw/pci-shmem.c
>> index f92bc75..a0c5ba8 100644
>> --- a/hw/pci-shmem.c
>> +++ b/hw/pci-shmem.c
>> @@ -357,7 +357,8 @@ int pci_shmem__init(struct kvm *kvm)
>> return 0;
>>
>> /* Register MMIO space for MSI-X */
>> - r = ioport__register(kvm, IOPORT_EMPTY, &shmem_pci__io_ops, IOPORT_SIZE, NULL);
>> + r = pci_get_io_port_block(IOPORT_SIZE);
>> + r = ioport__register(kvm, r, &shmem_pci__io_ops, IOPORT_SIZE, NULL);
>> if (r < 0)
>> return r;
>> ivshmem_registers = (u16)r;
>> diff --git a/hw/vesa.c b/hw/vesa.c
>> index f3c5114..404a8a3 100644
>> --- a/hw/vesa.c
>> +++ b/hw/vesa.c
>> @@ -60,8 +60,8 @@ struct framebuffer *vesa__init(struct kvm *kvm)
>>
>> if (!kvm->cfg.vnc && !kvm->cfg.sdl && !kvm->cfg.gtk)
>> return NULL;
>> -
>> - r = ioport__register(kvm, IOPORT_EMPTY, &vesa_io_ops, IOPORT_SIZE, NULL);
>> + r = pci_get_io_space_block(IOPORT_SIZE);
>
> I am confused. This is still registering I/O ports, right? And this
> (misnamed) function is about MMIO?
> So should it read r = pci_get_io_port_block(IOPORT_SIZE); ?
>
>> + r = ioport__register(kvm, r, &vesa_io_ops, IOPORT_SIZE, NULL);
>> if (r < 0)
>> return ERR_PTR(r);
>>
>> diff --git a/include/kvm/ioport.h b/include/kvm/ioport.h
>> index db52a47..b10fcd5 100644
>> --- a/include/kvm/ioport.h
>> +++ b/include/kvm/ioport.h
>> @@ -14,11 +14,8 @@
>>
>> /* some ports we reserve for own use */
>> #define IOPORT_DBG 0xe0
>> -#define IOPORT_START 0x6200
>> #define IOPORT_SIZE 0x400
>>
>> -#define IOPORT_EMPTY USHRT_MAX
>> -
>> struct kvm;
>>
>> struct ioport {
>> diff --git a/include/kvm/pci.h b/include/kvm/pci.h
>> index a86c15a..bdbd183 100644
>> --- a/include/kvm/pci.h
>> +++ b/include/kvm/pci.h
>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>> #define PCI_CONFIG_DATA 0xcfc
>> #define PCI_CONFIG_BUS_FORWARD 0xcfa
>> #define PCI_IO_SIZE 0x100
>> +#define PCI_IOPORT_START 0x6200
>> #define PCI_CFG_SIZE (1ULL << 24)
>>
>> struct kvm;
>> @@ -153,6 +154,7 @@ int pci__init(struct kvm *kvm);
>> int pci__exit(struct kvm *kvm);
>> struct pci_device_header *pci__find_dev(u8 dev_num);
>> u32 pci_get_io_space_block(u32 size);
>
> So I think this was already misnamed, but with your new function below
> becomes utterly confusing. Can we rename this to pci_get_mmio_space_block?
Yes, seems fair enough. I'll add a patch to rename that.
>
>> +u16 pci_get_io_port_block(u32 size);
>> void pci__assign_irq(struct device_header *dev_hdr);
>> void pci__config_wr(struct kvm *kvm, union pci_config_address addr, void *data, int size);
>> void pci__config_rd(struct kvm *kvm, union pci_config_address addr, void *data, int size);
>> diff --git a/ioport.c b/ioport.c
>> index a6dc65e..a72e403 100644
>> --- a/ioport.c
>> +++ b/ioport.c
>> @@ -16,24 +16,8 @@
>>
>> #define ioport_node(n) rb_entry(n, struct ioport, node)
>>
>> -DEFINE_MUTEX(ioport_mutex);
>> -
>> -static u16 free_io_port_idx; /* protected by ioport_mutex */
>> -
>> static struct rb_root ioport_tree = RB_ROOT;
>>
>> -static u16 ioport__find_free_port(void)
>> -{
>> - u16 free_port;
>> -
>> - mutex_lock(&ioport_mutex);
>> - free_port = IOPORT_START + free_io_port_idx * IOPORT_SIZE;
>> - free_io_port_idx++;
>> - mutex_unlock(&ioport_mutex);
>> -
>> - return free_port;
>> -}
>> -
>> static struct ioport *ioport_search(struct rb_root *root, u64 addr)
>> {
>> struct rb_int_node *node;
>> @@ -85,8 +69,6 @@ int ioport__register(struct kvm *kvm, u16 port, struct ioport_operations *ops, i
>> int r;
>>
>> br_write_lock(kvm);
>> - if (port == IOPORT_EMPTY)
>> - port = ioport__find_free_port();
>>
>> entry = ioport_search(&ioport_tree, port);
>> if (entry) {
>> diff --git a/pci.c b/pci.c
>> index 9edefa5..cd749db 100644
>> --- a/pci.c
>> +++ b/pci.c
>> @@ -19,6 +19,14 @@ static u32 pci_config_address_bits;
>> * PCI isn't currently supported.)
>> */
>> static u32 io_space_blocks = KVM_PCI_MMIO_AREA;
>> +static u16 io_port_blocks = PCI_IOPORT_START;
>> +
>> +u16 pci_get_io_port_block(u32 size)
>> +{
>> + u16 port = ALIGN(io_port_blocks, IOPORT_SIZE);
>
> Nit: Can we please have an empty line after the variable declaration?
>
We can :) .
Thanks,
--
Julien Thierry
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
