[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 16/31] hw/pci: Plumb _UID through host bridges
From: |
Michael S. Tsirkin |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 16/31] hw/pci: Plumb _UID through host bridges |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Feb 2021 10:24:43 -0500 |
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 03:00:56PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 16:59:33 -0800
> Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Currently, QEMU makes _UID equivalent to the bus number (_BBN). While
> > there is nothing wrong with doing it this way, CXL spec has a heavy
> > reliance on _UID to identify host bridges and there is no link to the
> > bus number. Having a distinct UID solves two problems. The first is it
> > gets us around the limitation of 256 (current max bus number).
Not sure I understand. You want more than 256 host bridges?
> The
> > second is it allows us to replicate hardware configurations where bus
> > number and uid aren't equivalent.
A bit more data on when this needs to be the case?
> The latter has benefits for our
> > development and debugging using QEMU.
> >
> > The other way to do this would be to implement the expanded bus
> > numbering, but having an explicit uid makes more sense when trying to
> > replicate real hardware configurations.
> >
> > The QEMU commandline to utilize this would be:
> > -device pxb-cxl,id=cxl.0,bus="pcie.0",bus_nr=1,uid=x
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
However, if doing this how do we ensure UID is still unique?
What do we do for cases where UID was not specified?
One idea is to generate a string UID and just stick the bus #
in there.
> > --
> >
> > I'm guessing this patch will be somewhat controversial. For early CXL
> > work, this can be dropped without too much heartache.
>
> Whilst I'm not personally against, this maybe best to drop for now as you
> say.
>
> > ---
> > hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 3 ++-
> > hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > hw/pci/pci.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > include/hw/pci/pci.h | 1 +
> > include/hw/pci/pci_bus.h | 1 +
> > 5 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > index cf6eb54c22..145a503e92 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > +++ b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > @@ -1343,6 +1343,7 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) {
> > uint8_t bus_num = pci_bus_num(bus);
> > uint8_t numa_node = pci_bus_numa_node(bus);
> > + int32_t uid = pci_bus_uid(bus);
> >
> > /* look only for expander root buses */
> > if (!pci_bus_is_root(bus)) {
> > @@ -1356,7 +1357,7 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > scope = aml_scope("\\_SB");
> > dev = aml_device("PC%.02X", bus_num);
> > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_BBN", aml_int(bus_num)));
> > - init_pci_acpi(dev, bus_num, pci_bus_is_express(bus) ? PCIE :
> > PCI);
> > + init_pci_acpi(dev, uid, pci_bus_is_express(bus) ? PCIE : PCI);
> >
> > if (numa_node != NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED) {
> > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_PXM", aml_int(numa_node)));
> > diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c
> > b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c
> > index b42592e1ff..5021b60435 100644
> > --- a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c
> > +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c
> > @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ struct PXBDev {
> >
> > uint8_t bus_nr;
> > uint16_t numa_node;
> > + int32_t uid;
> > };
> >
> > static PXBDev *convert_to_pxb(PCIDevice *dev)
As long as we are doing this, do we want to support a string uid too?
How about a 64 bit uid? Why not?
> > @@ -98,12 +99,20 @@ static uint16_t pxb_bus_numa_node(PCIBus *bus)
> > return pxb->numa_node;
> > }
> >
> > +static int32_t pxb_bus_uid(PCIBus *bus)
> > +{
> > + PXBDev *pxb = convert_to_pxb(bus->parent_dev);
> > +
> > + return pxb->uid;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void pxb_bus_class_init(ObjectClass *class, void *data)
> > {
> > PCIBusClass *pbc = PCI_BUS_CLASS(class);
> >
> > pbc->bus_num = pxb_bus_num;
> > pbc->numa_node = pxb_bus_numa_node;
> > + pbc->uid = pxb_bus_uid;
> > }
> >
> > static const TypeInfo pxb_bus_info = {
> > @@ -329,6 +338,7 @@ static Property pxb_dev_properties[] = {
> > /* Note: 0 is not a legal PXB bus number. */
> > DEFINE_PROP_UINT8("bus_nr", PXBDev, bus_nr, 0),
> > DEFINE_PROP_UINT16("numa_node", PXBDev, numa_node,
> > NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED),
> > + DEFINE_PROP_INT32("uid", PXBDev, uid, -1),
> > DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(),
> > };
> >
> > @@ -400,12 +410,21 @@ static const TypeInfo pxb_pcie_dev_info = {
> >
> > static void pxb_cxl_dev_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp)
> > {
> > + PXBDev *pxb = convert_to_pxb(dev);
> > +
> > /* A CXL PXB's parent bus is still PCIe */
> > if (!pci_bus_is_express(pci_get_bus(dev))) {
> > error_setg(errp, "pxb-cxl devices cannot reside on a PCI bus");
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > + if (pxb->uid < 0) {
> > + error_setg(errp, "pxb-cxl devices must have a valid uid
> > (0-2147483647)");
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* FIXME: Check that uid doesn't collide with UIDs of other host
> > bridges */
> > +
> > pxb_dev_realize_common(dev, CXL, errp);
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/pci/pci.c b/hw/pci/pci.c
> > index adbe8aa260..bf019d91a0 100644
> > --- a/hw/pci/pci.c
> > +++ b/hw/pci/pci.c
> > @@ -170,6 +170,11 @@ static uint16_t pcibus_numa_node(PCIBus *bus)
> > return NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED;
> > }
> >
> > +static int32_t pcibus_uid(PCIBus *bus)
> > +{
> > + return -1;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void pci_bus_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data)
> > {
> > BusClass *k = BUS_CLASS(klass);
> > @@ -184,6 +189,7 @@ static void pci_bus_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void
> > *data)
> >
> > pbc->bus_num = pcibus_num;
> > pbc->numa_node = pcibus_numa_node;
> > + pbc->uid = pcibus_uid;
> > }
> >
> > static const TypeInfo pci_bus_info = {
> > @@ -530,6 +536,11 @@ int pci_bus_numa_node(PCIBus *bus)
> > return PCI_BUS_GET_CLASS(bus)->numa_node(bus);
> > }
> >
> > +int pci_bus_uid(PCIBus *bus)
> > +{
> > + return PCI_BUS_GET_CLASS(bus)->uid(bus);
> > +}
> > +
> > static int get_pci_config_device(QEMUFile *f, void *pv, size_t size,
> > const VMStateField *field)
> > {
> > diff --git a/include/hw/pci/pci.h b/include/hw/pci/pci.h
> > index bde3697bee..a46de48ccd 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/pci/pci.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/pci/pci.h
> > @@ -463,6 +463,7 @@ static inline int pci_dev_bus_num(const PCIDevice *dev)
> > }
> >
> > int pci_bus_numa_node(PCIBus *bus);
> > +int pci_bus_uid(PCIBus *bus);
> > void pci_for_each_device(PCIBus *bus, int bus_num,
> > void (*fn)(PCIBus *bus, PCIDevice *d, void
> > *opaque),
> > void *opaque);
> > diff --git a/include/hw/pci/pci_bus.h b/include/hw/pci/pci_bus.h
> > index eb94e7e85c..3c9fbc55bb 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/pci/pci_bus.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/pci/pci_bus.h
> > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ struct PCIBusClass {
> >
> > int (*bus_num)(PCIBus *bus);
> > uint16_t (*numa_node)(PCIBus *bus);
> > + int32_t (*uid)(PCIBus *bus);
> > };
> >
> > enum PCIBusFlags {
- Re: [RFC PATCH v3 10/31] hw/pxb: Use a type for realizing expanders, (continued)
- [RFC PATCH v3 08/31] hw/cxl/device: Timestamp implementation (8.2.9.3), Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- [RFC PATCH v3 13/31] qtest: allow DSDT acpi table changes, Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- [RFC PATCH v3 11/31] hw/pci/cxl: Create a CXL bus type, Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- [RFC PATCH v3 12/31] hw/pxb: Allow creation of a CXL PXB (host bridge), Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- [RFC PATCH v3 14/31] acpi/pci: Consolidate host bridge setup, Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- [RFC PATCH v3 15/31] tests/acpi: remove stale allowed tables, Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- [RFC PATCH v3 16/31] hw/pci: Plumb _UID through host bridges, Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
[RFC PATCH v3 17/31] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142), Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01
- Re: [RFC PATCH v3 17/31] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142), Jonathan Cameron, 2021/02/02
- Re: [RFC PATCH v3 17/31] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142), Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/02
- Re: [RFC PATCH v3 17/31] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142), Jonathan Cameron, 2021/02/02
- Re: [RFC PATCH v3 17/31] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142), Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/02
- Re: [RFC PATCH v3 17/31] hw/cxl/component: Implement host bridge MMIO (8.2.5, table 142), Jonathan Cameron, 2021/02/02
[RFC PATCH v3 18/31] acpi/pxb/cxl: Reserve host bridge MMIO, Ben Widawsky, 2021/02/01