Re: [PATCH v15 4/5] xen/arm: translate virtual PCI bus topology for guests

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Stewart,

On 17/05/2024 18:06, Stewart Hildebrand wrote:
> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
>
> There are three  originators for the PCI configuration space access:
> 1. The domain that owns physical host bridge: MMIO handlers are
> there so we can update vPCI register handlers with the values
> written by the hardware domain, e.g. physical view of the registers
> vs guest's view on the configuration space.
> 2. Guest access to the passed through PCI devices: we need to properly
> map virtual bus topology to the physical one, e.g. pass the configuration
> space access to the corresponding physical devices.
> 3. Emulated host PCI bridge access. It doesn't exist in the physical
> topology, e.g. it can't be mapped to some physical host bridge.
> So, all access to the host bridge itself needs to be trapped and
> emulated.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babchuk@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Stewart Hildebrand <stewart.hildebrand@xxxxxxx>
With one remark below, for Arm:

Acked-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@xxxxxxxxxx>

[...]

> diff --git a/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c b/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c
> index 23722634d50b..98b294f09688 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c
> @@ -81,6 +81,30 @@ static int add_virtual_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>       return 0;
>   }
>   
> +/*
> + * Find the physical device which is mapped to the virtual device
> + * and translate virtual SBDF to the physical one.
> + */
> +bool vpci_translate_virtual_device(const struct domain *d, pci_sbdf_t *sbdf)
> +{
> +    const struct pci_dev *pdev;
> +
> +    ASSERT(!is_hardware_domain(d));
> +    ASSERT(rw_is_locked(&d->pci_lock));
> +
> +    for_each_pdev ( d, pdev )
(This doesn't need to be addressed now)


I see that we have other places with for_each_pdev() in the vCPI. So are 
we expecting the list to be smallish?
If not, then we may want to consider reworking the datastructure or put 
a limit on the number of PCI devices assigned.

> +    {
> +        if ( pdev->vpci && (pdev->vpci->guest_sbdf.sbdf == sbdf->sbdf) )
> +        {
> +            /* Replace guest SBDF with the physical one. */
> +            *sbdf = pdev->sbdf;
> +            return true;
> +        }
> +    }
> +
> +    return false;
> +}
> +
>   #endif /* CONFIG_HAS_VPCI_GUEST_SUPPORT */
>   
>   void vpci_deassign_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/vpci.h b/xen/include/xen/vpci.h
> index 980aded26fc1..7e5a0f0c50c1 100644
> --- a/xen/include/xen/vpci.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/vpci.h
> @@ -303,6 +303,18 @@ static inline bool __must_check 
> vpci_process_pending(struct vcpu *v)
>   }
>   #endif
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_VPCI_GUEST_SUPPORT
> +bool vpci_translate_virtual_device(const struct domain *d, pci_sbdf_t *sbdf);
> +#else
> +static inline bool vpci_translate_virtual_device(const struct domain *d,
> +                                                 pci_sbdf_t *sbdf)
> +{
> +    ASSERT_UNREACHABLE();
> +
> +    return false;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>   #endif
>   
>   /*
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall