Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > > > On 19/12/24 18:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > > > > > > On 6/12/24 09:24, Dan Williams wrote: > >> There are two components to establishing an encrypted link, provisioning > >> the stream in config-space, and programming the keys into the link layer > >> via the IDE_KM (key management) protocol. These helpers enable the > >> former, and are in support of TSM coordinated IDE_KM. When / if native > >> IDE establishment arrives it will share this same config-space > >> provisioning flow, but for now IDE_KM, in any form, is saved for a > >> follow-on change. > >> > >> With the TSM implementations of SEV-TIO and TDX Connect in mind this > >> abstracts small differences in those implementations. For example, TDX > >> Connect handles Root Port registers updates while SEV-TIO expects System > >> Software to update the Root Port registers. This is the rationale for > >> the PCI_IDE_SETUP_ROOT_PORT flag. > >> > >> The other design detail for TSM-coordinated IDE establishment is that > >> the TSM manages allocation of stream-ids, this is why the stream_id is > >> passed in to pci_ide_stream_setup(). > >> > >> The flow is: > >> > >> pci_ide_stream_probe() > >> Gather stream settings (devid and address filters) > >> pci_ide_stream_setup() > >> Program the stream settings into the endpoint, and optionally Root > >> Port) > >> pci_ide_enable_stream() > >> Run the stream after IDE_KM > >> > >> In support of system administrators auditing where platform IDE stream > >> resources are being spent, the allocated stream is reflected as a > >> symlink from the host-bridge to the endpoint. > >> > >> Thanks to Wu Hao for a draft implementation of this infrastructure. > >> > >> Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Co-developed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@xxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@xxxxxxx> > >> Co-developed-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> .../ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-pci-host-bridge | 28 +++ > >> drivers/pci/ide.c | 192 > >> ++++++++++++++++++++ > >> drivers/pci/pci.h | 4 > >> drivers/pci/probe.c | 1 > >> include/linux/pci-ide.h | 33 +++ > >> include/linux/pci.h | 4 > >> 6 files changed, 262 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 > >> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-pci-host-bridge > >> create mode 100644 include/linux/pci-ide.h > >> [..] > >> + __pci_ide_stream_setup(pdev, ide); > >> + if (flags & PCI_IDE_SETUP_ROOT_PORT) > >> + __pci_ide_stream_setup(rp, ide); > > Oh, when we do this, the root port gets the same devid_start/end as the > device which is not correct, what should be there, the rootport bdfn? > Need to dig that but PCI_IDE_SETUP_ROOT_PORT should detect that it is a > root port. Thanks, Why would the values be different? The Stream is associated with a set of RIDs, I expect the PF and the Root Port to agree on that set? Regardless, the PCI_IDE_SETUP_ROOT_PORT concept is dead so this could support distinct settings per Root Port vs endpoint, but I am missing where / why those would diverge.
