[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 5/9] xen/pci: split code to size BARs from pci_add_device
>>> On 30.06.17 at 17:01, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So that it can be called from outside in order to get the size of regular PCI > BARs. This will be required in order to map the BARs from PCI devices into PVH > Dom0 p2m. > > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c > @@ -588,6 +588,54 @@ static void pci_enable_acs(struct pci_dev *pdev) > pci_conf_write16(seg, bus, dev, func, pos + PCI_ACS_CTRL, ctrl); > } > > +int pci_size_mem_bar(unsigned int seg, unsigned int bus, unsigned int slot, > + unsigned int func, unsigned int pos, bool last, > + uint64_t *paddr, uint64_t *psize) > +{ > + uint32_t hi = 0, bar = pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos); > + uint64_t addr, size; > + > + ASSERT((bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE) == PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEMORY); > + pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos, ~0); > + if ( (bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK) == > + PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 ) > + { > + if ( last ) > + { > + printk(XENLOG_WARNING > + "device %04x:%02x:%02x.%u with 64-bit BAR in last > slot\n", This message needs to tell what kind of slot is being processed (just like the original did). > + seg, bus, slot, func); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + hi = pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos + 4); > + pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos + 4, ~0); > + } > + size = pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos) & > + PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK; > + if ( (bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK) == > + PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 ) > + { > + size |= (u64)pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos + 4) << 32; uint64_t > + pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos + 4, hi); > + } > + else if ( size ) > + size |= (u64)~0 << 32; Again (and more below). > + pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, pos, bar); > + size = -(size); Stray parentheses. > + addr = (bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK) | ((u64)hi << 32); > + > + if ( paddr ) > + *paddr = addr; > + if ( psize ) > + *psize = size; Is it reasonable to expect the caller to not care about the size? > @@ -663,38 +710,12 @@ int pci_add_device(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, > seg, bus, slot, func, i); > continue; > } > - pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, idx, ~0); > - if ( (bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK) == > - PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 ) > - { > - if ( i >= PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS ) > - { > - printk(XENLOG_WARNING > - "SR-IOV device %04x:%02x:%02x.%u with 64-bit" > - " vf BAR in last slot\n", > - seg, bus, slot, func); > - break; > - } > - hi = pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, slot, func, idx + 4); > - pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, idx + 4, ~0); > - } > - pdev->vf_rlen[i] = pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, slot, func, > idx) & > - PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK; > - if ( (bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK) == > - PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 ) > - { > - pdev->vf_rlen[i] |= (u64)pci_conf_read32(seg, bus, > - slot, func, > - idx + 4) << 32; > - pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, idx + 4, hi); > - } > - else if ( pdev->vf_rlen[i] ) > - pdev->vf_rlen[i] |= (u64)~0 << 32; > - pci_conf_write32(seg, bus, slot, func, idx, bar); > - pdev->vf_rlen[i] = -pdev->vf_rlen[i]; > - if ( (bar & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK) == > - PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 ) > - ++i; > + ret = pci_size_mem_bar(seg, bus, slot, func, idx, > + i == PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS - 1, NULL, > + &pdev->vf_rlen[i]); > + if ( ret < 0 ) > + break; ASSERT(ret) ? > + i += ret; Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |