[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 4/4] msi: taking interrupt format into consideration during judging a pirq is binded with a event channel
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:29:17PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: > From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: msi: taking interrupt format into consideration during > judging a pirq is binded with a event channel This is quite a long title, I think we can make it shorter. Maybe "msi: Handle MSI remapping format. > > As remapping format interrupt has been introduced, the vector in msi remapping > format can also be 0, same as a interrupt is binded with a event channel. > So we can't just use whether vector is 0 or not to judge a msi is binded > to a event channel or not. > > This patch takes the msi interrupt format into consideration. > > Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > hw/pci/msi.c | 5 +++-- > hw/pci/msix.c | 4 +++- > hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c | 2 +- > include/hw/xen/xen.h | 2 +- > xen-hvm-stub.c | 2 +- > xen-hvm.c | 7 ++++++- > 6 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci/msi.c b/hw/pci/msi.c > index a87b227..8d1ac9e 100644 > --- a/hw/pci/msi.c > +++ b/hw/pci/msi.c > @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ void msi_reset(PCIDevice *dev) > static bool msi_is_masked(const PCIDevice *dev, unsigned int vector) > { > uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev)); > - uint32_t mask, data; > + uint32_t mask, data, addr_lo; > bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT; > assert(vector < PCI_MSI_VECTORS_MAX); > > @@ -298,7 +298,8 @@ static bool msi_is_masked(const PCIDevice *dev, unsigned > int vector) > } > > data = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit)); > - if (xen_is_pirq_msi(data)) { > + addr_lo = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev)); This could be get_long, so addr_lo will actually have the all low bits of the addr. > + if (xen_is_pirq_msi(data, addr_lo)) { > return false; > } > > diff --git a/hw/pci/msix.c b/hw/pci/msix.c > index 0ec1cb1..6b8045a 100644 > --- a/hw/pci/msix.c > +++ b/hw/pci/msix.c > @@ -81,9 +81,11 @@ static bool msix_vector_masked(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned > int vector, bool fmask) > { > unsigned offset = vector * PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE; > uint8_t *data = &dev->msix_table[offset + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_DATA]; > + uint8_t *addr_lo = &dev->msix_table[offset + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_LOWER_ADDR]; > /* MSIs on Xen can be remapped into pirqs. In those cases, masking > * and unmasking go through the PV evtchn path. */ > - if (xen_enabled() && xen_is_pirq_msi(pci_get_long(data))) { > + if (xen_enabled() && xen_is_pirq_msi(pci_get_long(data), > + pci_get_long(addr_lo))) { > return false; > } > return fmask || dev->msix_table[offset + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_VECTOR_CTRL] & > diff --git a/hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c b/hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c > index 8b0d7fc..f799fed 100644 > --- a/hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c > +++ b/hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c > @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ static int msi_msix_setup(XenPCIPassthroughState *s, > > assert((!is_msix && msix_entry == 0) || is_msix); > > - if (xen_is_pirq_msi(data)) { > + if (xen_is_pirq_msi(data, (uint32_t)(addr & 0xffffffff))) { I don't think the cast is necessary. Also the & 0xffffffff is probably not needed as well. > *ppirq = msi_ext_dest_id(addr >> 32) | msi_dest_id(addr); > if (!*ppirq) { > /* this probably identifies an misconfiguration of the guest, > diff --git a/include/hw/xen/xen.h b/include/hw/xen/xen.h > index a8f3afb..c15beb5 100644 > --- a/include/hw/xen/xen.h > +++ b/include/hw/xen/xen.h > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ int xen_pci_slot_get_pirq(PCIDevice *pci_dev, int irq_num); > void xen_piix3_set_irq(void *opaque, int irq_num, int level); > void xen_piix_pci_write_config_client(uint32_t address, uint32_t val, int > len); > void xen_hvm_inject_msi(uint64_t addr, uint32_t data); > -int xen_is_pirq_msi(uint32_t msi_data); > +int xen_is_pirq_msi(uint32_t msi_data, uint32_t msi_addr_lo); > > qemu_irq *xen_interrupt_controller_init(void); > > diff --git a/xen-hvm-stub.c b/xen-hvm-stub.c > index c500325..dae421c 100644 > --- a/xen-hvm-stub.c > +++ b/xen-hvm-stub.c > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ void xen_hvm_inject_msi(uint64_t addr, uint32_t data) > { > } > > -int xen_is_pirq_msi(uint32_t msi_data) > +int xen_is_pirq_msi(uint32_t msi_data, uint32_t msi_addr_lo) > { > return 0; > } > diff --git a/xen-hvm.c b/xen-hvm.c > index 2f348ed..9e78b23 100644 > --- a/xen-hvm.c > +++ b/xen-hvm.c > @@ -146,8 +146,13 @@ void xen_piix_pci_write_config_client(uint32_t address, > uint32_t val, int len) > } > } > > -int xen_is_pirq_msi(uint32_t msi_data) > +int xen_is_pirq_msi(uint32_t msi_data, uint32_t msi_addr_lo) > { > + /* If msi address is configurate to remapping format, the msi will not > + * remapped into a pirq. > + */ > + if ( msi_addr_lo & 0x10 ) That's a magic number, is 0x10 MSI_ADDR_IM_MASK? Thanks, -- Anthony PERARD _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |