[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] interrupts: allow guest to set and clear MSI-X mask bit
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:54:41AM +0100, Joby Poriyath wrote: > Ping... > > Could you kindly review this? I believe Malcom reviewed and sent you an email with his response. Are you waiting for Andrew to look at it as well? Or Jan? Jan is out on vacation for a couple of weeks. Anyhow if it is Andrew that you are asking to look over it I would suggest you put his name on the 'To' in the email in case he is using filters to stick non-To emails in some 'lower priority' mailbox. > > Many thanks, > Joby > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 04:07:37PM +0100, Joby Poriyath wrote: > > Guest needs the ability to enable and disable MSI-X interrupts > > by setting the MSI-X control bit. Currently, a write to MSI-X > > mask bit by the guest is silently ignored. > > > > A likely scenario is where we have a 82599 SR-IOV nic passed > > through to a guest. From the guest if you do > > > > ifconfig <ETH_DEV> down > > ifconfig <ETH_DEV> up > > > > the interrupts remain masked. The the mask bit for the VF is > > being set by the PF performing a reset (at the request of the VF). > > However, interrupts are enabled by VF driver by clearing the mask > > bit by writing directly to BAR3 region containing the MSI-X table. > > > > From dom0, we can verify that > > interrupts are being masked using 'xl debug-keys M'. > > > > Initially, guest was allowed to modify MSI-X bit. > > Later this behaviour was changed. > > See changeset 74c213c506afcd74a8556dd092995fd4dc38b225. > > > > Signed-off-by: Joby Poriyath <joby.poriyath@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++------------- > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c > > index 36de312..97d9f93 100644 > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmsi.c > > @@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ struct msixtbl_entry > > uint32_t msi_ad[3]; /* Shadow of address low, high and data > > */ > > } gentries[MAX_MSIX_ACC_ENTRIES]; > > struct rcu_head rcu; > > + struct pirq *pirq; > > }; > > > > static DEFINE_RCU_READ_LOCK(msixtbl_rcu_lock); > > @@ -254,6 +255,9 @@ static int msixtbl_write(struct vcpu *v, unsigned long > > address, > > void *virt; > > unsigned int nr_entry, index; > > int r = X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE; > > + unsigned long flags; > > + struct irq_desc *desc; > > + unsigned long orig; > > > > if ( len != 4 || (address & 3) ) > > return r; > > @@ -283,20 +287,20 @@ static int msixtbl_write(struct vcpu *v, unsigned > > long address, > > if ( !virt ) > > goto out; > > > > - /* Do not allow the mask bit to be changed. */ > > -#if 0 /* XXX > > - * As the mask bit is the only defined bit in the word, and as the > > - * host MSI-X code doesn't preserve the other bits anyway, doing > > - * this is pointless. So for now just discard the write (also > > - * saving us from having to determine the matching irq_desc). > > - */ > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&desc->lock, flags); > > + desc = pirq_spin_lock_irq_desc(entry->pirq, &flags); > > + if ( !desc ) > > + goto out; > > + > > + /* The mask bit is the only defined bit in the word. But we > > + * ought to preserve the reserved bits. Clearing the reserved > > + * bits can result in undefined behaviour (see PCI Local Bus > > + * Specification revision 2.3). > > + */ > > orig = readl(virt); > > - val &= ~PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK; > > - val |= orig & PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK; > > + val &= PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK; > > + val |= ( orig & ~PCI_MSIX_VECTOR_BITMASK ); > > writel(val, virt); > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags); > > -#endif > > > > r = X86EMUL_OKAY; > > out: > > @@ -328,7 +332,8 @@ const struct hvm_mmio_handler msixtbl_mmio_handler = { > > static void add_msixtbl_entry(struct domain *d, > > struct pci_dev *pdev, > > uint64_t gtable, > > - struct msixtbl_entry *entry) > > + struct msixtbl_entry *entry, > > + struct pirq *pirq) > > { > > u32 len; > > > > @@ -342,6 +347,7 @@ static void add_msixtbl_entry(struct domain *d, > > entry->table_len = len; > > entry->pdev = pdev; > > entry->gtable = (unsigned long) gtable; > > + entry->pirq = pirq; > > > > list_add_rcu(&entry->list, &d->arch.hvm_domain.msixtbl_list); > > } > > @@ -404,7 +410,7 @@ int msixtbl_pt_register(struct domain *d, struct pirq > > *pirq, uint64_t gtable) > > > > entry = new_entry; > > new_entry = NULL; > > - add_msixtbl_entry(d, pdev, gtable, entry); > > + add_msixtbl_entry(d, pdev, gtable, entry, pirq); > > > > found: > > atomic_inc(&entry->refcnt); > > -- > > 1.7.10.4 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |