On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 06:22:56 +0200
Yi Min Zhao <zyi...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> PCIDevice pointer has been a parameter of kvm_arch_fixup_msi_route().
> So we don't need to store zpci idx in msix message data to find out the
> specific zpci device. Instead, we could use pci device id to find its
> corresponding zpci device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yi Min Zhao <zyi...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 16 +++++-----------
> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.h | 2 ++
> hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c | 24 ------------------------
> hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c | 6 ++++++
> target/s390x/kvm.c | 7 +++++--
> 5 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
> index 0a31a4ae88..bd8a3e1e1c 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
> @@ -199,8 +199,8 @@ static S390PCIBusDevice
> *s390_pci_find_dev_by_uid(S390pciState *s, uint16_t uid)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> -static S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(S390pciState *s,
> - const char *target)
> +S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(S390pciState *s,
> + const char *target)
> {
> S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev;
>
> @@ -465,19 +465,13 @@ static void s390_msi_ctrl_write(void *opaque, hwaddr
> addr, uint64_t data,
> unsigned int size)
> {
> S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev = opaque;
> - uint32_t idx = data >> ZPCI_MSI_VEC_BITS;
> uint32_t vec = data & ZPCI_MSI_VEC_MASK;
> uint64_t ind_bit;
> uint32_t sum_bit;
> - uint32_t e = 0;
>
> - DPRINTF("write_msix data 0x%" PRIx64 " idx %d vec 0x%x\n", data, idx,
> vec);
> -
> - if (!pbdev) {
> - e |= (vec << ERR_EVENT_MVN_OFFSET);
> - s390_pci_generate_error_event(ERR_EVENT_NOMSI, idx, 0, addr, e);
> - return;
> - }
> + assert(pbdev);
I'm wondering whether you could/should generate an error event here.
The one above probably won't work (as it seems to take idx as a
parameter), but is this really 'this must not happen, we messed up in
our code'? (Probably yes, but I want to be sure.)
> + DPRINTF("write_msix data 0x%" PRIx64 " idx %d vec 0x%x\n", data,
> + pbdev->idx, vec);
>
> if (pbdev->state != ZPCI_FS_ENABLED) {
> return;
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c
> index 7a642d376c..e501e1b9ea 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-stub.c
> @@ -74,3 +74,9 @@ S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx(S390pciState *s,
> uint32_t idx)
> {
> return NULL;
> }
Please remove s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx() from the stubs file, as it is
not used outside of the conditionally-built pci code anymore.
> +
> +S390PCIBusDevice *s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(S390pciState *s,
> + const char *target)
> +{
> + return NULL;
> +}
> diff --git a/target/s390x/kvm.c b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> index 1338c29528..3d490c5e4b 100644
> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> @@ -2533,10 +2533,13 @@ int kvm_arch_fixup_msi_route(struct
> kvm_irq_routing_entry *route,
> uint64_t address, uint32_t data, PCIDevice *dev)
> {
> S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev;
> - uint32_t idx = data >> ZPCI_MSI_VEC_BITS;
> uint32_t vec = data & ZPCI_MSI_VEC_MASK;
>
> - pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx(s390_get_phb(), idx);
> + if (!dev) {
> + return -ENODEV;
Can this actually happen?
> + }
> +
> + pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s390_get_phb(), DEVICE(dev)->id);
> if (!pbdev) {
> DPRINTF("add_msi_route no dev\n");
> return -ENODEV;
