在 2017/9/5 下午4:29, Cornelia Huck 写道:
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.)
I think this must not happen. One a pci device is plugged into zPCI bus.
We would assign a new memory region with zpci device as opaque
for its msix. So if s390_msi_ctrl_write() is called, there must be a write
operation to a pci device's msix ctrl memory region which must has zpci
device as a opaque. The construct is one-msi-mr-per-pci-device.
+ 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.
I'm confused. s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx() can be called in
kvm_arch_fixup_msi_route().
And kvm_arch_fixup_msi_route() can be called by kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route().
As the code, I think s390_pci_find_dev_by_idx() might be called. Could
you please
explain more?
+
+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?
I think this cannot happen. But I'm afraid that I miss something.
So I added this to avoid NULL pointer. But from the code and
my test, there has not been NULL pointer happened.
+ }
+
+ pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s390_get_phb(), DEVICE(dev)->id);
if (!pbdev) {
DPRINTF("add_msi_route no dev\n");
return -ENODEV;
