Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen:i386:pc_piix: create isa bridge specific to IGD passthrough

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2014/9/3 9:40, Kay, Allen M wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chen, Tiejun
> > Sent: Monday, September 01, 2014 12:50 AM
> > To: Michael S. Tsirkin
> > Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Kay, Allen M; qemu-devel@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen:i386:pc_piix: create
> > isa bridge specific to IGD passthrough
> >
> > On 2014/9/1 14:05, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 10:50:37AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> > > > On 2014/8/31 16:58, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 09:28:50AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> > > > > > On 2014/8/28 8:56, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +     */
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +    dev = pci_create_simple(bus, PCI_DEVFN(0x1f, 0),
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +                            "xen-igd-passthrough-isa-bridge");
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +    if (dev) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +        r = xen_host_pci_device_get(&hdev, 0, 0,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > + PCI_DEVFN(0x1f,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 0), 0);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +        if (!r) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +            pci_config_set_vendor_id(dev->config,
> > hdev.vendor_id);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +            pci_config_set_device_id(dev->config,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > + hdev.device_id);
> > > > > > > > > > Can you, instead, implement the reverse logic, probing the card
> > > > > > > > > > and supplying the correct device id for PCH?
> > > > > > > > > Here what is your so-called reverse logic as I already asked you
> > > > > > > > > previously? Do you mean I should list all PCHs with a combo
> > > > > > > > > illustrated with the vendor/device id in advance? Then look up
> > > > > > > > > if we can find a
> > > > > > > > Michael,
> > > > > > > Ping.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > Tiejun
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Could you explain this exactly? Then I can try follow-up your
> > > > > > > > idea ASAP if this is necessary and possible.
> > > > > > Michel,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Could you give us some explanation for your "reverse logic" when
> > > > > > you're free?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Tiejun
> > > > > So future drivers will look at device ID for the card and figure out
> > > > > how things should work from there.
> > > > > Old drivers still poke at device id of the chipset for this, but
> > > > > maybe qemu can do what newer drivers do:
> > > > > look at the card and figure out what guest should do, then present
> > > > > the appropriate chipset id.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is based on what Jesse said:
> > > > >         Practically speaking, we could probably assume specific GPU/PCH
> > combos,
> > > > >         as I don't think they're generally mixed across generations, though
> > SNB
> > > > >         and IVB did have compatible sockets, so there is the possibility of
> > > > >         mixing CPT and PPT PCHs, but those are register identical as far as the
> > > > >         graphics driver is concerned, so even that should be safe.
> > > > Michael,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your explanation.
> > > >
> > > > > so the idea is to have a reverse table mapping GPU back to PCH.
> > > > > Present to guest the ID that will let it assume the correct GPU.
> > > > I guess you mean we should create to maintain such a table:
> > > >
> > > > [GPU Card: device_id(s), PCH: device_id]
> > > >
> > > > Then each time, instead of exposing that real PCH device id directly,
> > > > qemu first can get the real GPU device id to lookup this table to
> > > > present a appropriate PCH's device id to the guest.
> > > >
> > > > And looks here that appropriate PCH's device id is not always a that
> > > > real PCH's device id. Right? If I'm wrong please correct me.
> > > Exactly: we don't really care what the PCH ID is - we only need it for
> > > the guest driver to do the right thing.
> > Agreed.
> >
> > I need to ask Allen to check if one given GPU card device id is always
> > corresponding to one given PCH on both HSW and BDW currently. If yes, I can
> > do this quickly. Otherwise I need some time to establish that sort
> > of connection.
Michael,

Sorry for this delay response but please keep in mind we really are in 
this process.
You know this involve different GPU components we have to take some time 
to communicate or even discuss internal.
Now I have a draft codes, could you take a look at this? I hope that 
comment can help us to understand something, but if you have any 
question, we can further respond inline.
---
typedef struct {
    uint16_t gpu_device_id;
    uint16_t pch_device_id;
} XenIGDDeviceIDInfo;

/* In real world different GPU should have different PCH. But actually
 * the different PCH DIDs likely map to different PCH SKUs. We do the
 * same thing for the GPU. For PCH, the different SKUs are going to be
 * all the same silicon design and implementation, just different
 * features turn on and off with fuses. The SW interfaces should be
 * consistent across all SKUs in a given family (eg LPT). But just same
 * features may not be supported.
 *
 * Most of these different PCH features probably don't matter to the
 * Gfx driver, but obviously any difference in display port connections
 * will so it should be fine with any PCH in case of passthrough.
 *
 * So currently use one PCH version, 0x8c4e, to cover all HSW scenarios,
 * 0x9cc3 for BDW.
 */
static const XenIGDDeviceIDInfo xen_igd_combo_id_infos[] = {
    /* HSW Classic */
    {0x0402, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT1D, HSWD_w7 */
    {0x0406, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT1M, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0412, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT2D, HSWD_w7 */
    {0x0416, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT2M, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x041E, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT15D, HSWD_w7 */
    /* HSW ULT */
    {0x0A06, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT1UT, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0A16, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT2UT, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0A26, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT3UT, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0A2E, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT3UT28W, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0A1E, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT2UX, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0A0E, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT1ULX, HSWM_w7 */
    /* HSW CRW */
    {0x0D26, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT3CW, HSWM_w7 */
    {0x0D22, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWGT3CWDT, HSWD_w7 */
    /* HSW Server */
    {0x041A, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWSVGT2, HSWD_w7 */
    /* HSW SRVR */
    {0x040A, 0x8c4e}, /* HSWSVGT1, HSWD_w7 */
    /* BSW */
    {0x1606, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWULTGT1, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x1616, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWULTGT2, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x1626, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWULTGT3, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x160E, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWULXGT1, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x161E, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWULXGT2, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x1602, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWHALOGT1, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x1612, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWHALOGT2, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x1622, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWHALOGT3, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x162B, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWHALO28W, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x162A, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWGT3WRKS, BDWM_w7 */
    {0x162D, 0x9cc3}, /* BDWGT3SRVR, BDWM_w7 */
};

static void xen_igd_passthrough_pciisabridge_get_pci_device_id(Object *obj,
                                                               Visitor *v,
                                                               void 
*opaque,
                                                               const 
char *name,
                                                               Error 
**errp)
{
    uint32_t value = 0;
    XenHostPCIDevice hdev;
    int r = 0, num;

    r = xen_host_pci_device_get(&hdev, 0, 0, 0x02, 0);
    if (!r) {
        value = hdev.device_id;

        num = sizeof(xen_igd_combo_id_infos)/sizeof(uint16_t);
        for (r = 0; r < num; r++)
            if (value == xen_igd_combo_id_infos[r].gpu_device_id)
                value = xen_igd_combo_id_infos[r].pch_device_id;
    }

    visit_type_uint32(v, &value, name, errp);
}

static void xen_igd_passthrough_isa_bridge_initfn(Object *obj)
{
    object_property_add(obj, "device-id", "int",
                        xen_igd_passthrough_pciisabridge_get_pci_device_id,
                        NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
}

Thanks
Tiejun


> >
> If I understand this correctly, the only difference is instead of reading PCH 
> DevID/RevID from the host hardware, QEMU inserts those values into PCH virtual 
> device by looking at the reverse mapping table it maintains.
>
> I agree the downside of doing this is the reverse mapping table may be hard to 
> maintain.
>
> What is the advantage of doing this instead of having QEMU reading it from the 
> host?  Is it to test to make sure reverse mapping methods works before it is 
> adopted in the new drivers?
>
> > Thanks
> > Tiejun
> >
> > > > > the problem with these tables is they are hard to keep up to date
> > > > Yeah. But I think currently we can just start from some modern CPU
> > > > such as HSW and BDW, then things could be easy.
> > > >
> > > > Allen,
> > > >
> > > > Any idea to this suggestion?
> > > >
> > > > > as new hardware comes out, but as future hardware won't need these
> > > > > hacks, we shall be fine.
> > > > Yeah.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Tiejun
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > Tiejun
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > matched PCH? If yes, what is that benefit you expect in
> > > > > > > > > passthrough case? Shouldn't we pass these info to VM directly in
> > passthrough case?
> > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > Tiejun
> Allen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel