Hi Shameer,
On 3/12/19 5:39 PM, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Auger Eric [mailto:eric.au...@redhat.com]
>> Sent: 12 March 2019 15:38
>> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.th...@huawei.com>;
>> Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
>> Cc: peter.mayd...@linaro.org; sa...@linux.intel.com;
>> shannon.zha...@gmail.com; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Linuxarm
>> <linux...@huawei.com>; qemu-...@nongnu.org; xuwei (O)
>> <xuw...@huawei.com>; sebastien.bo...@intel.com
>> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 08/11] hw/arm/boot: Expose the
>> PC-DIMM nodes in the DT
>>
>> Hi Shameer,
>>
>> On 3/12/19 4:13 PM, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Igor Mammedov [mailto:imamm...@redhat.com]
>>>> Sent: 11 March 2019 14:59
>>>> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.th...@huawei.com>
>>>> Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org; qemu-...@nongnu.org;
>>>> eric.au...@redhat.com; peter.mayd...@linaro.org;
>>>> shannon.zha...@gmail.com; sa...@linux.intel.com;
>>>> sebastien.bo...@intel.com; Linuxarm <linux...@huawei.com>; xuwei (O)
>>>> <xuw...@huawei.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] hw/arm/boot: Expose the PC-DIMM nodes in
>> the
>>>> DT
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 11:42:15 +0000
>>>> Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.th...@huawei.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This patch adds memory nodes corresponding to PC-DIMM regions.
>>>>>
>>>>> NVDIMM and ACPI_NVDIMM configs are not yet set for ARM so we
>>>>> don't need to care about NVDIMM at this stage.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum
>> <shameerali.kolothum.th...@huawei.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> hw/arm/boot.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/hw/arm/boot.c b/hw/arm/boot.c
>>>>> index a830655..4caaf91 100644
>>>>> --- a/hw/arm/boot.c
>>>>> +++ b/hw/arm/boot.c
>>>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>>>>> #include "sysemu/numa.h"
>>>>> #include "hw/boards.h"
>>>>> #include "hw/loader.h"
>>>>> +#include "hw/mem/memory-device.h"
>>>>> #include "elf.h"
>>>>> #include "sysemu/device_tree.h"
>>>>> #include "qemu/config-file.h"
>>>>> @@ -522,6 +523,41 @@ static void fdt_add_psci_node(void *fdt)
>>>>> qemu_fdt_setprop_cell(fdt, "/psci", "migrate", migrate_fn);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> +static int fdt_add_hotpluggable_memory_nodes(void *fdt,
>>>>> + uint32_t acells,
>>>> uint32_t scells) {
>>>>> + MemoryDeviceInfoList *info, *info_list = qmp_memory_device_list();
>>>>> + MemoryDeviceInfo *mi;
>>>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + for (info = info_list; info != NULL; info = info->next) {
>>>>> + mi = info->value;
>>>>> + switch (mi->type) {
>>>>> + case MEMORY_DEVICE_INFO_KIND_DIMM:
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + PCDIMMDeviceInfo *di = mi->u.dimm.data;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + ret = fdt_add_memory_node(fdt, acells, di->addr,
>>>>> + scells, di->size, di->node);
>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>> + fprintf(stderr,
>>>>> + "couldn't add PCDIMM
>> /memory@%"PRIx64"
>>>> node\n",
>>>>> + di->addr);
>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + default:
>>>>> + fprintf(stderr, "%s memory nodes are not yet
>> supported\n",
>>>>> + MemoryDeviceInfoKind_str(mi->type));
>>>>> + ret = -ENOENT;
>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +out:
>>>>> + qapi_free_MemoryDeviceInfoList(info_list);
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> int arm_load_dtb(hwaddr addr, const struct arm_boot_info *binfo,
>>>>> hwaddr addr_limit, AddressSpace *as)
>>>>> {
>>>>> @@ -621,6 +657,12 @@ int arm_load_dtb(hwaddr addr, const struct
>>>> arm_boot_info *binfo,
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> + rc = fdt_add_hotpluggable_memory_nodes(fdt, acells, scells);
>>>> According to Eric's test, guest kernel picks this up. So it probably
>>>> should be an opt-in feature to avoid conflict with ACPI definition in DSDT.
>>>
>>> Ok. My take away from that discussion was that if we properly describe the
>>> PNP0C80 (which is what #06 of this series does) then we don't have to worry
>>> about DT entries as ACPI will "override" it. But it looks like that is not
>>> the
>> case
>>> and describing DT will anyway cause the memory being end up in UEFI
>>> GeTMemoryMap() and results in being used as normal memory early at boot.
>>>
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> How do we verify that this is actually happening? I tried running the
>> /proc/meminfo
>>> on a Qemu build upto #06 of this series, and it reported memory including
>>> the
>>> cold plugged dimm memory.
>>>
>>> But not sure how to verify that this dimm mem is being treated as normal
>> mem on
>>> boot time or not? Please let me know.
>>
>> At the time I tested I did not have PNP0C80 build. I confirm that if you
>> remove the dt description in ACPI mode, /proc/meminfo does not report
>> the DIMMs. Now that you have #06, if you remove the DT hotpluggables
>> memory mode generation in ACPI mode, you should see them and if I
>> understand correctly this is what you confirm. I have not tested
>> anything else at the moment.
>
> Yes, that is what I confirmed. But the concern now is having DT memory node
> generation will result in the problem described above - UEFI GetMemoryMap().
Sorry I don't understand the stated problem. If you remove the call to
fdt_add_hotpluggable_memory_nodes when running in ACPI mode, does the
above GetMemoryMap see the DIMMs?
Thanks
Eric
>
> I was looking for a way to check that is a valid issue or not. I will try to
> look for
> a way to verify that. Please update if you come across anything.
>
> Thanks,
> Shameer
>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Eric
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shameer
>>>
>>>
>>>>> + if (rc < 0) {
>>>>> + fprintf(stderr, "couldn't add hotpluggable memory nodes\n");
>>>>> + goto fail;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> rc = fdt_path_offset(fdt, "/chosen");
>>>>> if (rc < 0) {
>>>>> qemu_fdt_add_subnode(fdt, "/chosen");
>>>
>>>
