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

Re: [PATCH] vpci: Add resizable bar support


  • To: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 03:44:52 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=amd.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=amd.com; dkim=pass header.d=amd.com; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=kUDaNk2JcwCEVOf8M2jImzF0xKE5N8uU/OBY+gCzBoc=; b=xUpUHDvgZaryYxhBqbP767o+jJD4WlHRL0C9y4pUCdSCIs6U/jwH3NnRnRxE9MMqyLrpaSVR9pXJ0zz+DlBEZ0CTXz7da65l+n1ytqZPyvMf9pMkNJ57fj0gD3FgmzukdCAv6Jv+ww2iJKrPkEfUzqdxedtswt+7hc+aPquupMCkVQ9j+aPufxbq6x1tp1J9MDwr7T+GsBoA01zg/QOAu23eEdhwZkhlgNBqxHqmIkVEzGj9XwpL43z+XsMRsvZvTvTfgxODUeybCfRxKPYxNjgfdZSVqOW82kaVrY8Y2bjP4dY1513bOEGqVaH2mkDLLY7PmhnhwC81qCUNc7ReoQ==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=dHD0PdW+GpW3qhJx1nPCYgaWjsY3tT3E7wXHIGrlyZ4YWVUSimAbGo+VyMhyNmejYWsKOidS5PJyLDww5O6OdKcUid/hVdtax3JYUMhf5eMrKBTyW/G3Hzv3lrHcHRXtEgNtb9ihrVBPTYWYsZEVddmrvM7MsuY+BiSRJ+gL5q5NSgpRORjvBL1MozZ9mBJIlsLRj+U8F8a2z8js7i26Edo3jm4eTKjaytj/i8gyj+IodxciDBiu+8+zhkhek1z9d8pwvppCteD0pBRnwVHz9tdWkSt2Y/u6+2jVuiiAcUzrEfYHAEQxc5MHMGwSVaxUdH2pDB6nF3XpRjNYFUHACA==
  • Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=amd.com;
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@xxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 03:45:31 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
  • Thread-index: AQHbNaIlMxf8mJcywkeNRFmHEai1qbK08gcAgACKfwD//4ZQAIABzRcAgAAfLACAAB0/gIABIxcAgAAMOoCABNwTAIABfwWAgAFxTQD//+JeAIABss4A///tiAAAzKybgA==
  • Thread-topic: [PATCH] vpci: Add resizable bar support

On 2024/11/21 17:52, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 03:05:14AM +0000, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>> On 2024/11/20 17:01, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 03:01:57AM +0000, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>>>> The only difference between our methods is the timing of updating the size.
>>>> Yours is later than mine because you updated the size when the driver 
>>>> re-enabled memory decoding, while I updated the size in time when driver 
>>>> resize it.
>>>
>>> Indeed, my last guess is the stale cached size is somehow used in my
>>> approach, and that leads to the failures.  One last (possibly dummy?)
>>> thing to try might be to use your patch to detect writes to the resize
>>> control register, but update the BAR sizes in modify_bars(), while
>>> keeping the traces of when the operations happen.
>>>
>> This can work, combine our method, use my patch to detect and write the size 
>> into hardware register, and use your patch to update bar[i].size in 
>> modify_bars().
>> Attached the combined patch and the xl dmesg.
> 
> This is even weirder, so the attached patch works fine?  The only
> difference with my proposal is that you trap the CTRL registers, but
> the sizing is still done in modify_bars().
> 
> What happens if (based on the attached patch) you change
> rebar_ctrl_write() to:
> 
> static void cf_check rebar_ctrl_write(const struct pci_dev *pdev,
>                                       unsigned int reg,
>                                       uint32_t val,
>                                       void *data)
> {
>     pci_conf_write32(pdev->sbdf, reg, val);
> }
> 
If I change rebar_ctrl_write() to:
static void cf_check rebar_ctrl_write(const struct pci_dev *pdev,
                                      unsigned int reg,
                                      uint32_t val,
                                      void *data)
{
    printk("cjq_debug %pp: bar ctrl write reg %u, val %x\n", &pdev->sbdf, reg, 
val);
    pci_conf_write32(pdev->sbdf, reg, val);
}

I can see three time prints, it can't work.
(XEN) cjq_debug 0000:03:00.0: bar ctrl write reg 520, val d40
(XEN) cjq_debug 0000:03:00.0: bar ctrl write reg 520, val d40
(XEN) cjq_debug 0000:03:00.0: bar ctrl write reg 528, val 102

If I change rebar_ctrl_write() to:
static void cf_check rebar_ctrl_write(const struct pci_dev *pdev,
                                      unsigned int reg,
                                      uint32_t val,
                                      void *data)
{
    if ( pci_conf_read16(pdev->sbdf, PCI_COMMAND) & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY )
        return;
    printk("cjq_debug %pp: bar ctrl write reg %u, val %x\n", &pdev->sbdf, reg, 
val);
    pci_conf_write32(pdev->sbdf, reg, val);
} 

I can only see one time print:
(XEN) cjq_debug 0000:03:00.0: bar ctrl write reg 520, val d40

The check prevented the two times incorrect write actions.
    if ( pci_conf_read16(pdev->sbdf, PCI_COMMAND) & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY )
        return;

And why my original patch can work too, the check:
+    ctrl = pci_conf_read32(pdev->sbdf, reg);
+    if ( ctrl == val )
+        return;
happened to play the same role as PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY check.

> Thanks, Roger.

-- 
Best regards,
Jiqian Chen.



 


Rackspace

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