On 04/15/2014 04:55 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 04/15/2014 04:00 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Juan Quintela <address@hidden> writes:
Juan Quintela <address@hidden> wrote:
Hi
Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
Thanks, Juan.
As there are no topics, no call.
Did we have a call anyway? IRC log looks like we did...
Yes, we did. Whoever attended, please reply with things I mixed up or
forgot.
Two topics:
1) pSeries IOMMU bus
Live migration registers the name for a migration blob in
register_savevm_live() through qdev bus enumeration. The IOMMUs in our
pSeries machine don't live on any bus, so they all get the same name.
That leads to problems when we change the order of -device arguments on
the command line.
One proposed solution to this is to create a bus for IOMMUs which allows
us to give each IOMMU a unique name; patch is on the list.
Another proposed solution is to give devices the chance to override
their name themselves. IOMMUs do know their system wide unique ID and
can easily generate a unique device name for themselves. If we keep
names the way they were without this callback, we can stay backwards
compatible for x86 and have our IOMMUs return unique names.
2) -device for non-PCI devices
There are 2 reasons we want to create "platform" devices using -device
on the command line. One is that Xilinx is trying to create a full
machine from the command line. The other one is that we want VFIO for
platform devices.
a) IRQs
The "Anthony" way of doing IRQ links between random devices is his
stateful Pin object approach. Since Anthony is gone and it'd be a lot of
refactoring, we don't deem this approach realistic.
Andreas suggested that we could make every qemu_irq a QOM object that
then gets a global name in the QOM hierarchy and can be addressed as
connector for IRQ output lines of devices in the -device command line
syntax.
b) Memory Regions
The "Anthony" approach was to turn memory regions into QOM objects. That
allows to expose memory region links as QOM links.
The currently proposed approach is to add a -sysbusdev (or -device)
command line option that hard codedly puts memory region n of device x
into address a of the physical address space.
c) Device Granularity
We talked about the granularity of VFIO platform devices per -device
option. I was advocating that we should have a -device granularity that
"makes sense" for the user, rather than individual separate components.
The main reason for that is that we lose information about links of
different components of a device when we make it separate devices.
Hi Alex, all
in last week [RFC v2 5/6] virt: Assign a VFIO platform device to a virt
VM in QEMU command line,
available in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-04/msg01419.html
I proposed an implementation using this kind of option line
-device vfio-platform,vfio_device="fff51000.ethernet",\
compat="calxeda/hb-xgmac",mmap-timeout-ms=1000
where the machine file, ie. virt.c does the bulk of the work to simplify
the work for the end-user. For devices that are more complex than the
Midway xgmac we could imagine to have some device specific code in
virt.c.
I am not satified with the implementation which calls the realize
function twice. However on the principle, do you think this could make
sense?