On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 02:38:44PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 08:23:25 -0400 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 01:58:49PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 15:23:04 +0530 > > > Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 27-Jun-2023, at 2:32 PM, Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 21:42:44 +0530 > > > > > Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> PCI Express ports only have one slot, so PCI Express devices can > > > > >> only be > > > > >> plugged into slot 0 on a PCIE port. Enforce it. > > > > > > > > > > btw, previously you mentioned ARI. > > > > > So if we turn it on, wouldn't this patch actually become regression? > > > > > > > > > > > > > If ARI breaks this, it will break other areas in QEMU too, ex anywhere > > > > pci_get_function_0() is used. > > > > Regardless, I think at least the tests are worth fixing, particularly > > > > the mess with hd-geo-test. > > > > > > I'm fine with this patch if you test it with ARI enabled and it won't > > > break > > > something that has been working before this patch. Just mention what > > > testing > > > you've done in commit message. > > > > Oh yes. That's why it was checking !vf originally. It's because the most > > common use of ARI is SRIOV, so it works a a kind of hack. > > should we check for ARI cap instead of vf hack? > why we haven't that from the beginning?
Maybe. ARI is a capability, driver has to activate it, so it's not 100% It does not help that our ARI implementation is broken in several places. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> CC: jus...@redhat.com > > > > >> CC: imamm...@redhat.com > > > > >> Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2128929 > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com> > > > > >> Reviewed-by: Julia Suvorova <jus...@redhat.com> > > > > >> --- > > > > >> hw/pci/pci.c | 6 ++++++ > > > > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > >> > > > > >> diff --git a/hw/pci/pci.c b/hw/pci/pci.c > > > > >> index bf38905b7d..426af133b0 100644 > > > > >> --- a/hw/pci/pci.c > > > > >> +++ b/hw/pci/pci.c > > > > >> @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ bool pci_available = true; > > > > >> static char *pcibus_get_dev_path(DeviceState *dev); > > > > >> static char *pcibus_get_fw_dev_path(DeviceState *dev); > > > > >> static void pcibus_reset(BusState *qbus); > > > > >> +static bool pcie_has_upstream_port(PCIDevice *dev); > > > > >> > > > > >> static Property pci_props[] = { > > > > >> DEFINE_PROP_PCI_DEVFN("addr", PCIDevice, devfn, -1), > > > > >> @@ -1189,6 +1190,11 @@ static PCIDevice > > > > >> *do_pci_register_device(PCIDevice *pci_dev, > > > > >> name); > > > > >> > > > > >> return NULL; > > > > >> + } else if (pcie_has_upstream_port(pci_dev) && PCI_SLOT(devfn)) { > > > > >> + error_setg(errp, "PCI: slot %d is not valid for %s," > > > > >> + " parent device only allows plugging into slot > > > > >> 0.", > > > > >> + PCI_SLOT(devfn), name); > > > > >> + return NULL; > > > > >> } > > > > >> > > > > >> pci_dev->devfn = devfn; > > > > > > > > > > >
