[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v6 1/9] xen/arm: introduce static shared memory



Hi Penny,

On 29/08/2022 07:57, Penny Zheng wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 9:17 PM
To: Penny Zheng <Penny.Zheng@xxxxxxx>; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>; Bertrand Marquis
<Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>; Volodymyr Babchuk
<Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/9] xen/arm: introduce static shared memory

Hi Penny,


Hi Julien
On 21/07/2022 14:21, Penny Zheng wrote:
From: Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@xxxxxxx>

This patch series introduces a new feature: setting up static shared
memory on a dom0less system, through device tree configuration.

This commit parses shared memory node at boot-time, and reserve it in
bootinfo.reserved_mem to avoid other use.

This commits proposes a new Kconfig CONFIG_STATIC_SHM to wrap
static-shm-related codes, and this option depends on static memory(
CONFIG_STATIC_MEMORY). That's because that later we want to reuse a
few helpers, guarded with CONFIG_STATIC_MEMORY, like
acquire_staticmem_pages, etc, on static shared memory.

Signed-off-by: Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@xxxxxxx>
---
v6 change:
- when host physical address is ommited, output the error message
since xen doesn't support it at the moment
- add the following check: 1) The shm ID matches and the region
exactly match
2) The shm ID doesn't match and the region doesn't overlap
- change it to "unsigned int" to be aligned with nr_banks
- check the len of the property to confirm is it big enough to contain
"paddr", "size", and "gaddr"
- shm_id defined before nr_shm_domain, so we could re-use the existing
hole and avoid increasing the size of the structure.
- change "nr_shm_domain" to "nr_shm_borrowers", to not increment if
the role is owner in parsing code
- make "xen,shm_id" property as arbitrary string, with a strict limit
on the number of characters, MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH
---
v5 change:
- no change
---
v4 change:
- nit fix on doc
---
v3 change:
- make nr_shm_domain unsigned int
---
v2 change:
- document refinement
- remove bitmap and use the iteration to check
- add a new field nr_shm_domain to keep the number of shared domain
---
   docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++
   xen/arch/arm/Kconfig                  |   6 +
   xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c                | 157 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
   xen/arch/arm/include/asm/setup.h      |   9 ++
   4 files changed, 296 insertions(+)

diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
index 98253414b8..8013fb98fe 100644
--- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
@@ -378,3 +378,127 @@ device-tree:

   This will reserve a 512MB region starting at the host physical address
   0x30000000 to be exclusively used by DomU1.
+
+Static Shared Memory
+====================
+
+The static shared memory device tree nodes allow users to statically
+set up shared memory on dom0less system, enabling domains to do
+shm-based communication.
+
+- compatible
+
+    "xen,domain-shared-memory-v1"
+
+- xen,shm-id
+
+    An arbitrary string that represents the unique identifier of the shared
+    memory region, with a strict limit on the number of characters(\0
included),
+    `MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH(16)`. e.g. "xen,shm-id = "my-shared-mem-1"".
+
+- xen,shared-mem
+
+    An array takes a physical address, which is the base address of the
+    shared memory region in host physical address space, a size, and a
guest
+    physical address, as the target address of the mapping.
+    e.g. xen,shared-mem = < [host physical address] [size] [guest
+ address] >

Your implementation below is checking for overlap and also have some
restriction. Can they be documented in the binding?

+
+    The number of cells for the host address (and size) is the same as the
+    guest pseudo-physical address and they are inherited from the parent
node.

In v5, we discussed to have the host address optional. However, the binding
has not been updated to reflect that. Note that I am not asking to implement,
but instead request that the binding can be used for such setup.


How about:
"
Host physical address could be omitted by users, and let Xen decide where it 
locates.
"

I am fine with that.

Do you think I shall further point out that right now, this part feature is not 
implemented
in codes?

I have made a couple of suggestion for the code. But I think the binding would look a bit odd without the host physical address. We would now have:

< [size] [guest address]>

I think it would be more natural if we had

<[guest address] [size]>

And

<[guest address] [size] [host physical address]>


a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/setup.h
b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/setup.h
index 2bb01ecfa8..39d4e93b8b 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/setup.h
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/setup.h
@@ -23,10 +23,19 @@ typedef enum {
   }  bootmodule_kind;


+#ifdef CONFIG_STATIC_SHM
+/* Indicates the maximum number of characters(\0 included) for shm_id
+*/ #define MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH 16 #endif

Is the #ifdef really needed?

+
   struct membank {
       paddr_t start;
       paddr_t size;
       bool xen_domain; /* whether the memory bank is bound to a Xen
domain. */
+#ifdef CONFIG_STATIC_SHM
+    char shm_id[MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH];
+    unsigned int nr_shm_borrowers;
+#endif
   };

If I calculated right, the structure will grow from 24 to 40 bytes. At the
moment, this is protected with CONFIG_STATIC_SHM which is unsupported.
However, I think we will need to do something as we can't continue to grow
'membank' like that.

I don't have a quick suggestion for 4.17 (the feature freeze is in a week). Long
term, I think we will want to consider to move the shm ID in a separate array
that could be referenced here.

The other solution would be to have the shared memory regions in a
separate array. They would have their own structure which would either
embedded "membank" or contain a pointer/index to the bank.


Ok, so other than this fixing, others will be addressed in the next serie. And 
this
part fixing will be introduced in a new follow-up patch serie after 4.17 
release.

I'm in favor of introducing a new structure to contain shm-related data and let
'membank' contains a pointer to it, like
```
  +struct shm_membank {
+    char shm_id[MAX_SHM_ID_LENGTH];
+    unsigned int nr_shm_borrowers;
+}
+
  struct membank {
      paddr_t start;
      paddr_t size;
      bool xen_domain; /* whether the memory bank is bound to a Xen domain. */
+    struct shm_membank *shm;
  };
```
Then every time we introduce a new feature here, following this strategy, 
'membank' will
at most grow 8 bytes for the reference.

Be aware that we are very early in Xen and therefore dynamically allocating memory is not possible. Therefore 'shm_membank' would most likely need to be static.

At which point, this could be an index.


I'm open to the discussion and will let it decide what it finally will be. ;)

My original idea was to have 'shm_membank' pointing to the 'membank' rather than the other way around. But I don't have a strong argument either way.

So I would need to see the resulting code. Anyway, that's for post-4.17.

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.