[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/PCI: avoid re-evaluation of extended config space accessibility


  • To: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 15:48:52 +0100
  • Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stewart Hildebrand <stewart.hildebrand@xxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 03 Feb 2026 14:49:03 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 02.02.2026 16:18, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> My copy of the PCI Firmware Spec v3.3 contains:
> 
> "4.1.2. MCFG Table Description
> 
> The MCFG table is an ACPI table that is used to communicate the base
> addresses corresponding to the non-hot removable PCI Segment Groups
> range within a PCI Segment Group available to the operating system at
> boot.
> 
> [...]
> 
> 4.1.3. The _CBA Method
> 
> Some systems may support hot plug of host bridges that introduce
> either a range of buses within an existing PCI Segment Group or
> introduce a new PCI Segment Group. For example, each I/O chip in a
> multi-chip PCI Express root complex implementation could start a new
> PCI Segment Group."
> 
> Together with this:
> 
> "The MCFG table format allows for more than one memory mapped base
> address entry provided each entry (memory mapped configuration space
> base address allocation structure) corresponds to a unique PCI Segment
> Group consisting of 256 PCI buses. Multiple entries corresponding to a
> single PCI Segment Group is not allowed."
> 
> Given that each segment group can only appear once in the MCFG, and
> that the _CBA method can introduce new segment groups, it would seem
> to me the spec does allow for new segments appearing exclusively as
> the return of _CBA method?  It does read as if hot-removable segment
> groups must not appear in the MCFG table.  I'm not finding any clear
> statement in the spec that says that ECAM areas must previously appear
> in the MCFG table.
> 
> I'm not sure how common that is, but it doesn't seem impossible given
> my reading of the spec.

Hmm, that'll be a bit of work then, as Dom0 will also need to propagate
the necessary data into Xen.

Jan



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.