[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v7 10/12] vpci: add initial support for virtual PCI bus topology
On 13.06.2023 12:32, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote: > @@ -121,6 +124,62 @@ int vpci_add_handlers(struct pci_dev *pdev) > } > > #ifdef CONFIG_HAS_VPCI_GUEST_SUPPORT > +static int add_virtual_device(struct pci_dev *pdev) > +{ > + struct domain *d = pdev->domain; > + pci_sbdf_t sbdf = { 0 }; > + unsigned long new_dev_number; > + > + if ( is_hardware_domain(d) ) > + return 0; > + > + ASSERT(pcidevs_locked()); > + > + /* > + * Each PCI bus supports 32 devices/slots at max or up to 256 when > + * there are multi-function ones which are not yet supported. > + */ > + if ( pdev->info.is_extfn ) > + { > + gdprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "%pp: only function 0 passthrough supported\n", > + &pdev->sbdf); > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + } > + > + new_dev_number = find_first_zero_bit(d->vpci_dev_assigned_map, > + VPCI_MAX_VIRT_DEV); > + if ( new_dev_number >= VPCI_MAX_VIRT_DEV ) > + return -ENOSPC; > + > + __set_bit(new_dev_number, &d->vpci_dev_assigned_map); Since the find-and-set can't easily be atomic, the lock used here ( asserted to be held above) needs to be the same as ... > + /* > + * Both segment and bus number are 0: > + * - we emulate a single host bridge for the guest, e.g. segment 0 > + * - with bus 0 the virtual devices are seen as embedded > + * endpoints behind the root complex > + * > + * TODO: add support for multi-function devices. > + */ > + sbdf.devfn = PCI_DEVFN(new_dev_number, 0); > + pdev->vpci->guest_sbdf = sbdf; > + > + return 0; > + > +} > + > +static void vpci_remove_virtual_device(const struct pci_dev *pdev) > +{ > + write_lock(&pdev->domain->vpci_rwlock); > + if ( pdev->vpci ) > + { > + __clear_bit(pdev->vpci->guest_sbdf.dev, > + &pdev->domain->vpci_dev_assigned_map); > + pdev->vpci->guest_sbdf.sbdf = ~0; > + } > + write_unlock(&pdev->domain->vpci_rwlock); ... the one used here. Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |