[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 5/8] x86: acpi: let the firmware handle pending "CPU remove"
From: |
Igor Mammedov |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 5/8] x86: acpi: let the firmware handle pending "CPU remove" events in SMM |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Dec 2020 13:57:42 +0100 |
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 22:20:27 -0800
Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 2020-12-04 9:09 a.m., Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > if firmware and QEMU negotiated CPU hotunplug support, generate
> > _EJ0 method so that it will mark CPU for removal by firmware and
> > pass control to it by triggering SMI.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > include/hw/acpi/cpu.h | 1 +
> > hw/acpi/cpu.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> > hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/hw/acpi/cpu.h b/include/hw/acpi/cpu.h
> > index d71edde456..999caaf510 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/acpi/cpu.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/acpi/cpu.h
> > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ void cpu_hotplug_hw_init(MemoryRegion *as, Object *owner,
> > typedef struct CPUHotplugFeatures {
> > bool acpi_1_compatible;
> > bool has_legacy_cphp;
> > + bool fw_unplugs_cpu;
> > const char *smi_path;
> > } CPUHotplugFeatures;
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/acpi/cpu.c b/hw/acpi/cpu.c
> > index 811218f673..bded2a837f 100644
> > --- a/hw/acpi/cpu.c
> > +++ b/hw/acpi/cpu.c
> > @@ -341,6 +341,7 @@ const VMStateDescription vmstate_cpu_hotplug = {
> > #define CPU_INSERT_EVENT "CINS"
> > #define CPU_REMOVE_EVENT "CRMV"
> > #define CPU_EJECT_EVENT "CEJ0"
> > +#define CPU_FW_EJECT_EVENT "CEJF"
> >
> > void build_cpus_aml(Aml *table, MachineState *machine, CPUHotplugFeatures
> > opts,
> > hwaddr io_base,
> > @@ -393,7 +394,10 @@ void build_cpus_aml(Aml *table, MachineState *machine,
> > CPUHotplugFeatures opts,
> > aml_append(field, aml_named_field(CPU_REMOVE_EVENT, 1));
>
> Bit 2: Device remove event, used to distinguish device for which
> no device eject request to OSPM was issued. Firmware must
> ignore this bit.
>
> > /* initiates device eject, write only */
> > aml_append(field, aml_named_field(CPU_EJECT_EVENT, 1));
>
> Bit 3: reserved and should be ignored by OSPM
>
> > - aml_append(field, aml_reserved_field(4));
> > + aml_append(field, aml_reserved_field(1));
> > + /* tell firmware to do device eject, write only */
> > + aml_append(field, aml_named_field(CPU_FW_EJECT_EVENT, 1));
> > + aml_append(field, aml_reserved_field(2));
>
> Shouldn't this be instead:
>
> > - aml_append(field, aml_reserved_field(4));
> > + /* tell firmware to do device eject, write only */
> > + aml_append(field, aml_named_field(CPU_FW_EJECT_EVENT, 1));
> > + aml_append(field, aml_reserved_field(3));
>
yes, it should be this way,
I'll fix in v2
> Bit 4: if set to 1, OSPM requests firmware to perform device eject.
> Bit 5-7: reserved and should be ignored by OSPM
>
> Otherwise AFAICS CPU_FW_EJECT_EVENT would correspond to bit 5.
>
>
> Ankur
>
> > aml_append(field, aml_named_field(CPU_COMMAND, 8));
> > aml_append(cpu_ctrl_dev, field);
> >
> > @@ -428,6 +432,7 @@ void build_cpus_aml(Aml *table, MachineState *machine,
> > CPUHotplugFeatures opts,
> > Aml *ins_evt = aml_name("%s.%s", cphp_res_path, CPU_INSERT_EVENT);
> > Aml *rm_evt = aml_name("%s.%s", cphp_res_path, CPU_REMOVE_EVENT);
> > Aml *ej_evt = aml_name("%s.%s", cphp_res_path, CPU_EJECT_EVENT);
> > + Aml *fw_ej_evt = aml_name("%s.%s", cphp_res_path,
> > CPU_FW_EJECT_EVENT);
> >
> > aml_append(cpus_dev, aml_name_decl("_HID",
> > aml_string("ACPI0010")));
> > aml_append(cpus_dev, aml_name_decl("_CID",
> > aml_eisaid("PNP0A05")));
> > @@ -470,7 +475,13 @@ void build_cpus_aml(Aml *table, MachineState *machine,
> > CPUHotplugFeatures opts,
> >
> > aml_append(method, aml_acquire(ctrl_lock, 0xFFFF));
> > aml_append(method, aml_store(idx, cpu_selector));
> > - aml_append(method, aml_store(one, ej_evt));
> > + if (opts.fw_unplugs_cpu) {
> > + aml_append(method, aml_store(one, fw_ej_evt));
> > + aml_append(method, aml_store(aml_int(OVMF_CPUHP_SMI_CMD),
> > + aml_name("%s", opts.smi_path)));
> > + } else {
> > + aml_append(method, aml_store(one, ej_evt));
> > + }
> > aml_append(method, aml_release(ctrl_lock));
> > }
> > aml_append(cpus_dev, method);
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > index 9036e5594c..475e76f514 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > +++ b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > @@ -1586,6 +1586,7 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > CPUHotplugFeatures opts = {
> > .acpi_1_compatible = true, .has_legacy_cphp = true,
> > .smi_path = pm->smi_on_cpuhp ? "\\_SB.PCI0.SMI0.SMIC" : NULL,
> > + .fw_unplugs_cpu = pm->smi_on_cpu_unplug,
> > };
> > build_cpus_aml(dsdt, machine, opts, pm->cpu_hp_io_base,
> > "\\_SB.PCI0", "\\_GPE._E02");
> >
>
- [PATCH 0/8] add support for cpu hot-unplug with SMI broadcast enabled, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04
- [PATCH 5/8] x86: acpi: let the firmware handle pending "CPU remove" events in SMM, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04
- [PATCH 6/8] tests/acpi: update expected files, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04
- [PATCH 7/8] x86: ich9: factor out "guest_cpu_hotplug_features", Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04
- [PATCH 1/8] hw: add compat machines for 6.0, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04
- [PATCH 2/8] acpi: cpuhp: introduce 'firmware performs eject' status/control bits, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04
- Re: [PATCH 2/8] acpi: cpuhp: introduce 'firmware performs eject' status/control bits, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/07
[PATCH 4/8] tests/acpi: allow expected files change, Igor Mammedov, 2020/12/04