Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 11/12] spapr vfio: enable for spapr

[Alex Williamson]

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 21:34 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 09/11/2013 08:13 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 19:00 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >> On 09/06/2013 05:05 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 20:15 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >>>> This turns the sPAPR support on and enables VFIO container use
> >>>> in the kernel.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> Changes:
> >>>> v4:
> >>>> * fixed format string to use %m which is a glibc extension:
> >>>> "Print output of strerror(errno). No argument is required."
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  hw/misc/vfio.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/hw/misc/vfio.c b/hw/misc/vfio.c
> >>>> index 4210471..882da70 100644
> >>>> --- a/hw/misc/vfio.c
> >>>> +++ b/hw/misc/vfio.c
> >>>> @@ -2815,6 +2815,36 @@ static int vfio_connect_container(VFIOGroup 
> >>>> *group, VFIOAddressSpace *space)
> >>>>  
> >>>>          memory_listener_register(&container->iommu_data.listener,
> >>>>                                   container->space->as);
> >>>> +    } else if (ioctl(fd, VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION, VFIO_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU)) {
> >>>> +        ret = ioctl(group->fd, VFIO_GROUP_SET_CONTAINER, &fd);
> >>>> +        if (ret) {
> >>>> +            error_report("vfio: failed to set group container: %m");
> >>>> +            g_free(container);
> >>>> +            close(fd);
> >>>> +            return -errno;
> >>>> +        }
> >>>> +
> >>>> +        ret = ioctl(fd, VFIO_SET_IOMMU, VFIO_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU);
> >>>> +        if (ret) {
> >>>> +            error_report("vfio: failed to set iommu for container: %m");
> >>>> +            g_free(container);
> >>>> +            close(fd);
> >>>> +            return -errno;
> >>>> +        }
> >>>> +
> >>>> +        ret = ioctl(fd, VFIO_IOMMU_ENABLE);
> >>>> +        if (ret) {
> >>>> +            error_report("vfio: failed to enable container: %m");
> >>>> +            g_free(container);
> >>>> +            close(fd);
> >>>> +            return -errno;
> >>>
> >>> These (and the copies that already exist in this function) are screaming
> >>> for a goto.
> >>
> >>
> >> Heh. So. There should be 2 patches then - one adding gotos to the existing
> >> code and another one adding new functionality-with-gotos-already.
> >> I can do that, is it what you suggest?
> > 
> > Yes please.
> > 
> >> What about the rest of the series? Next time I will split "[Qemu-devel]
> >> [PATCH v4 05/12] spapr_pci: convert init to realize" but the rest will be
> >> still the same. I have understanding that Alex Graf is expecting you to
> >> review the whole thing (ack/sob? not sure how this all works) before he
> >> pulls it into his tree.
> > 
> > Oh, I've been picking out the vfio ones to review.  Ok, on the next
> > revision I'll review them all, but please still split it into series for
> > vfio and series for ppc.  Thanks,
> > 
> > Alex
> > 
> 
> This is the whole set of what I have on this matter:
> 
> KVM: spapr-vfio: enable in-kernel acceleration
> spapr-vfio: enable for spapr
> 
> spapr-vfio: add spapr-pci-vfio-host-bridge to support vfio
> spapr-iommu: add SPAPR VFIO IOMMU device
> spapr-iommu: introduce SPAPR_TCE_TABLE class
> spapr-pci: converts fprintf to error_report
> spapr-pci: add spapr_pci trace
> spapr-pci: introduce a finish_realize() callback
> spapr-pci: convert init() callback to realize()
> 
> spapr vfio: add vfio_container_spapr_get_info()
> vfio: Add guest side IOMMU support
> vfio: Create VFIOAddressSpace objects as needed
> vfio: Introduce VFIO address spaces
> vfio: rework to have error paths
> vfio: Fix 128 bit handling
> vfio: Fix debug output for int128 values
> int128: add int128_exts64()
> 
> There are 3 sets: vfio stuff (8 patches), spapr-pci rework (7 patches) and
> finally the enablement (2 patches). Post it as 3 series? Or split 128bit
> things to a series as well? :)

Yes, it would be great if you sent the 128bit stuff separately.  I keep
running into the debug output bug but your patch for it is buried among
a few other series that aren't ready and that I've lost track of.  Just
like individual patches, series should contain the smallest useful set
of changes that they can and be targeted at a single subsystem.  That
way we can agree on some things, get them in and move on to the harder
ones.  Thanks,

Alex