Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] VIA PM: Implement basic ACPI support

[BALATON Zoltan]

On Sat, 28 Oct 2023, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2023, Bernhard Beschow wrote:
> > Am 28. Oktober 2023 12:58:32 UTC schrieb BALATON Zoltan 
> > <balaton@eik.bme.hu>:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2023, Bernhard Beschow wrote:
> > > > This series is part of my work to bring the VIA south bridges to the PC 
> > > > machine
> > > > [1]. It implements missing ACPI functionality which ACPI-aware x86 guests
> > > > expect for a smooth experience. The implementation is heavily inspired by 
> > > > PIIX4.
> > >
> > > I think first the interrupt routing should be fixed because that may 
> > > change a few things in this series so that should be the next step and 
> > > then rebase this series on top of that.
> > >
> > > What I mean by fixing interrupt routing? You may remember this discussion:
> > >
> > > https://patchew.org/QEMU/cover.1677004414.git.balaton@eik.bme.hu/
> > >
> > > With pegasos2 your (over)simplification worked only because the firmware 
> > > of that machine maps everythnig to one ISA IRQ and guests were happy with 
> > > that. I told you that back then but could not convince you and Mark about 
> > > that. Now with the amigaone machine the firmware maps VIA devices and PCI 
> > > interuupt pins to different ISA IRQs so we need to go back either to my 
> > > otiginal implementation or something else you come up with. You can test 
> > > this trying to use USB devices with amigaone machine which only works 
> > > after reverting 4e5a20b6da9b1 and 422a6e8075752. So please either propose 
> > > something to fix that first or wait with this series until I can update my 
> > > pathches to solve interrupt routing. I think this series should wait until 
> > > after that because it adds more interrupt handling which should follow 
> > > whatever way we come up with for that so it's too early fir this series 
> > > yet. (If you want to try fixing it keep in mind that in both amigaone and 
> > > pegasos2 the PCI buses are in the north brid
> ge not in the VIA south bridge so don't try to force the IRQ mapping into the 
> PCI bus. All the VIA chip needs to do is mapping its PIRQ/PINT pins to ISA 
> IRQs as the VIA is only handling ISA IRQs and all other pci stuff is handled 
> in the north bridge. So I think we need a via_set_isa_irq function but we 
> could change it according to Mark's idea to pass the PCI device and use its 
> function number to select itq source instead of the enum I had in my original 
> series.)
> > > I have some other comments that I'll add in reply to individual patches 
> > > for the future/
> >
> > Hi Zoltan,
> >
> > The interrupt handling introduced in this series is not related to PCI 
> > interrupt routing: The SMI is a dedicated pin on the device and the SCI is 
> > mapped internally to an ISA interrupt (note how the power management 
> > function lacks the registers for PCI interrupt information). Hence, PCI 
> > interrupt routing isn't changed in this series and therefore seems 
> > off-topic to me.
> >
> > Moreover, the SMI is a new interrupt which is therefore not used in any 
> > machine yet. The SCI is deactivated if set to IRQ 0 which is the default 
> > even. If a guest configures it, it shall be aware to receive an *ISA* 
> > interrupt.
> >
> > So I think this series shouldn't conflict with any previous work and should 
> > not be blocked by the PCI IRQ routing topic.
>
> The topic I've raised is not about routing PCI interrupts but routing 
> different IRQ sources in VIA chip (such as different functions plus the 
> PIRQ/PINT pins) to ISA interrupts so that would conflict with how the PM func 
> interrupts are routed. I think only the isa function should have qemu_irqs 
> and it should handle mapping of the different sources to the appropriate ISA 
> IRQ so the different sources (functions) should not have their own qemu_irqs 
> or gpios but they would just call via_isa_set_irq with their PCIDevice, pun 
> and level and then the isa model would do the routing. I plan to do this 
> eventually but it you're adding more things that would need to be reverted 
> then it becomes more difficult.

I've submitted a series with these changes that I think should be the way 
to go. The PM device could then do what I've proposed before and the 
routing of sci to ISA or SMI can be done in the switch in via_isa_set_irq. 
I've left the via-ide device alone for now to avoid conflicting with 
Mark's series but maybe in the future that could also be converted back at 
some point. It's not important at the moment as that's using separate 
interrupts on all machines so should work either way for now so can be 
done any time later.

Regards,
BALATON Zoltan