|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 15/28] x86/vvtd: Enable Queued Invalidation through GCMD
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 02:22:22PM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> Software writes to QIE field of GCMD to enable or disable queued
> invalidations. This patch emulates QIE field of GCMD.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.h | 3 ++-
> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/vvtd.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.h
> b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.h
> index dc2df75..b71dab8 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.h
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.h
> @@ -160,7 +160,8 @@
> #define DMA_GSTS_FLS (((u64)1) << 29)
> #define DMA_GSTS_AFLS (((u64)1) << 28)
> #define DMA_GSTS_WBFS (((u64)1) << 27)
> -#define DMA_GSTS_QIES (((u64)1) <<26)
> +#define DMA_GSTS_QIES_SHIFT 26
> +#define DMA_GSTS_QIES (((u64)1) << DMA_GSTS_QIES_SHIFT)
> #define DMA_GSTS_IRES_SHIFT 25
> #define DMA_GSTS_IRES (((u64)1) << DMA_GSTS_IRES_SHIFT)
> #define DMA_GSTS_SIRTPS_SHIFT 24
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/vvtd.c
> b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/vvtd.c
> index 83805d1..a2fa64a 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/vvtd.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/vvtd.c
> @@ -539,6 +539,20 @@ static void write_gcmd_ire(struct vvtd *vvtd, uint32_t
> val)
> (vvtd, DMAR_GSTS_REG, DMA_GSTS_IRES_SHIFT);
> }
>
> +static void write_gcmd_qie(struct vvtd *vvtd, uint32_t val)
> +{
> + bool set = val & DMA_GCMD_QIE;
> +
> + vvtd_info("%sable Queue Invalidation\n", set ? "En" : "Dis");
> +
> + if ( set )
> + vvtd_set_reg_quad(vvtd, DMAR_IQH_REG, 0);
If QIE is already enabled and the user writes to GCMD with the QIE bit
set won't this wrongly clear the invalidation queue?
> +
> + (set ? vvtd_set_bit : vvtd_clear_bit)
> + (vvtd, DMAR_GSTS_REG, DMA_GSTS_QIES_SHIFT);
> +
> +}
> +
> static void write_gcmd_sirtp(struct vvtd *vvtd, uint32_t val)
> {
> uint64_t irta = vvtd_get_reg_quad(vvtd, DMAR_IRTA_REG);
> @@ -598,6 +612,10 @@ static void vvtd_write_gcmd(struct vvtd *vvtd, uint32_t
> val)
> write_gcmd_sirtp(vvtd, val);
> if ( changed & DMA_GCMD_IRE )
> write_gcmd_ire(vvtd, val);
> + if ( changed & DMA_GCMD_QIE )
> + write_gcmd_qie(vvtd, val);
> + if ( changed & ~(DMA_GCMD_SIRTP | DMA_GCMD_IRE | DMA_GCMD_QIE) )
> + vvtd_info("Only SIRTP, IRE, QIE in GCMD are handled");
This seems quite likely to go out of sync. I would rather do:
if ( changed & DMA_GCMD_QIE )
{
write_gcmd_qie(vvtd, val);
changed &= ~DMA_GCMD_QIE;
}
...
if ( changed )
vvtd_info("Unhandled bit detected: %...");
It seems also quite likely this can be simplified with a macro:
#define HANDLE_GCMD_BIT(bit) \
if ( changed & DMA_GCMD_ ## bit ) \
{ \
write_gcmd_ ## bit (vvtd, val); \
changed &= ~DMA_GCMD_ ## bit; \
}
So that you can write:
HANDLE_GCMD_BIT(IRE);
HANDLE_GCMD_BIT(QIE);
...
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |