|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [v10][PATCH 06/16] hvmloader/pci: Try to avoid placing BARs in RMRRs
On 07/20/2015 12:30 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 20.07.15 at 08:16, <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> --- a/tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c
>> +++ b/tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c
>> @@ -38,6 +38,43 @@ uint64_t pci_hi_mem_start = 0, pci_hi_mem_end = 0;
>> enum virtual_vga virtual_vga = VGA_none;
>> unsigned long igd_opregion_pgbase = 0;
>>
>> +/* Check if any conflicts with all reserved device memory. */
>
> /* Check if the specified range conflicts with any reserved device memory. */
>
> (and the "any" could perhaps be left out)
>
>> +static bool check_overlap_all(uint64_t start, uint64_t size)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int i;
>> +
>> + for ( i = 0; i < memory_map.nr_map; i++ )
>> + {
>> + if ( memory_map.map[i].type == E820_RESERVED &&
>> + check_overlap(start, size,
>> + memory_map.map[i].addr,
>> + memory_map.map[i].size) )
>> + return true;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* Find the lowest RMRR higher than base. */
>> +static int find_next_rmrr(uint32_t base)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int i;
>> + int next_rmrr = -1;
>> + uint64_t min_base = (1ull << 32);
>> +
>> + for ( i = 0; i < memory_map.nr_map ; i++ )
>> + {
>> + if ( memory_map.map[i].type == E820_RESERVED &&
>> + memory_map.map[i].addr > base &&
>> + memory_map.map[i].addr < min_base )
>> + {
>> + next_rmrr = i;
>> + min_base = memory_map.map[i].addr;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return next_rmrr;
>> +}
>
> Considering _both_ callers, I think the function should actually return
> the lowest RMRR higher than or equal to base.
You mean instead of strictly greater than the base.
> Or wait - we actually
> need to find the lowest RMRR the _end_ of which is higher than base.
Yes, you're right: there's always a risk that pci_mem_start will *start*
in the middle of a range. Looking for the next *end* is more robust.
>> @@ -407,6 +456,19 @@ void pci_setup(void)
>> }
>>
>> base = (resource->base + bar_sz - 1) & ~(uint64_t)(bar_sz - 1);
>> +
>> + /* If we're using mem_resource, check for RMRR conflicts. */
>> + while ( resource == &mem_resource &&
>> + next_rmrr > 0 &&
>
>> = I think.
Yes, > is a typo; I certainly meant to type >=.
>
>> + check_overlap(base, bar_sz,
>> + memory_map.map[next_rmrr].addr,
>> + memory_map.map[next_rmrr].size) )
>> + {
>> + base = memory_map.map[next_rmrr].addr +
>> memory_map.map[next_rmrr].size;
>> + base = (base + bar_sz - 1) & ~(uint64_t)(bar_sz - 1);
>
> Pointless cast.
This was copy-and-pasted from the line above. I had assumed that bar_sz
was uint32_t (perhaps it was at some point), but I guess now it's
pointless there too. :-)
-George
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |