Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/1] s390x/pci: Extend pci representation by new zpci device

[Frank Blaschka]

On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 09:38:37PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03.03.15 14:25, Frank Blaschka wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 10:33:05AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Am 03.03.2015 um 09:06 schrieb Frank Blaschka <address@hidden>:
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 04:34:06PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 26.02.15 16:27, Frank Blaschka wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 03:39:15PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 26.02.15 12:59, Frank Blaschka wrote:
> >>>>>>> This patch extends the current s390 pci implementation to
> >>>>>>> provide more flexibility in configuration of s390 specific
> >>>>>>> device handling. For this we had to introduce a new facility
> >>>>>>> (and bus) to hold devices representing information actually
> >>>>>>> provided by s390 firmware and I/O configuration.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On s390 the physical structure of the pci system (bridge, bus, slot)
> >>>>>>> in not shown to the OS. For this the pci bridge and bus created
> >>>>>>> in qemu can also not be shown to the guest. The new zpci device class
> >>>>>>> represents this abstract view on the bare pci function and allows to
> >>>>>>> provide s390 specific configuration attributes for it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sample qemu configuration:
> >>>>>>> -device e1000,id=zpci1
> >>>>>>> -device ne2k_pci,id=zpci2
> >>>>>>> -device zpci,fid=2,uid=1248,pci_id=zpci1
> >>>>>>> -device zpci,fid=17,uid=2244,pci_id=zpci2
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A zpci device references the corresponding PCI device via device id.
> >>>>>>> The new design allows to define multiple host bridges and support more
> >>>>>>> pci devices.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Isn't this reverse? Shouldn't it rather be
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  -device zpci,...,id=zpci1
> >>>>>>  -device e1000,bus=zpci1.0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> with a limit on each virtual zpci bus to only support one device?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you mean something like having multiple host bridges (providing a 
> >>>>> pci bus
> >>>>> each) and limit the bus to just one device?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -device s390-pcihost,fid=16,uid=1234
> >>>>> -device s390-pcihost,fid=17,uid=5678
> >>>>> -device e1000,bus=pci.0
> >>>>> -device ne2k_pci,bus=pci.1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We also discussed this option but we don't like the idea to put 
> >>>>> attributes
> >>>>> belong to the pci device to the host bridge.
> >>>>
> >>>> I guess I'm not grasping something obvious here :). What exactly are the
> >>>> attributes again?
> >>> Sorry for the late response, I was on vacation the last couple days.
> >>>
> >>> The fid and uid values are provided by microcode/io layer on the real 
> >>> hardware.
> >>
> >> So they are arbitrary numbers? What uniqueness constraints do we have on 
> >> them?
> > fid and uid must be unique within the same qemu. At a first look the 
> > numbers are
> > arbitrary but our configuration folks want explicitly define a particular 
> > fid and uid
> > to better support migration and pass-through scenarios.
> 
> Well, at the end of the day you want to make sure they're identical on
> both sides, yes.
> 
> >> IIUC you can only have a single pcie device behind a virtual "bus" anyway, 
> >> so what if we just calculate uid and fid from the bus id?
> > I think this similar to the current implementation. We use the slot (idea 
> > for the future was
> > bus + slot) to generate uid and fid. But this is not flexible enough. As I 
> > said, our
> > configuration folks want to be able to specify fid and uid for the device.
> 
> I don't see how this is different from what PPC does with its LIOBN
> which is a property of the PHB.
> 
> 
> Alex
> 

I played arround with the idea of having multiple host bridges and this worked 
well
at least for static (non hotplug) configuration. In case I want to hotplug a 
host
bridge I got following error:

(qemu) device_add s390-pcihost,fid=8,uid=9
Bus 'main-system-bus' does not support hotplugging

Is there anything I have to enable to support this?

I have: has_dynamic_sysbus = 1 and cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet = 
false
but this seems not to help for the hotplug case.

Frank