Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH v3 4/4] target-ppc: Handle ibm, nmi-register RTAS call

[Aravinda Prasad]

On Wednesday 05 November 2014 04:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05.11.14 11:37, Aravinda Prasad wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday 05 November 2014 02:02 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05.11.14 08:13, Aravinda Prasad wrote:
>>>> This patch adds FWNMI support in qemu for powerKVM
>>>> guests by handling the ibm,nmi-register rtas call.
>>>> Whenever OS issues ibm,nmi-register RTAS call, the
>>>> machine check notification address is saved and the
>>>> machine check interrupt vector 0x200 is patched to
>>>> issue a private hcall.
>>>>
>>>> This patch also handles the cases when multi-processors
>>>> experience machine check at or about the same time.
>>>> As per PAPR, subsequent processors serialize waiting
>>>> for the first processor to issue the ibm,nmi-interlock call.
>>>> The second processor retries if the first processor which
>>>> received a machine check is still reading the error log
>>>> and is yet to issue ibm,nmi-interlock call.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Aravinda Prasad <address@hidden>
>>>> ---
>>>>  hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c            |   16 +++++++
>>>>  hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c             |   93 
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  include/hw/ppc/spapr.h          |   17 +++++++
>>>>  pc-bios/spapr-rtas/spapr-rtas.S |   38 ++++++++++++++++
>>>>  4 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>>>> index 8f16160..eceb5e5 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>>>> @@ -97,6 +97,9 @@ struct rtas_mc_log {
>>>>      struct rtas_error_log err_log;
>>>>  };
>>>>  
>>>> +/* Whether machine check handling is in progress by any CPU */
>>>> +bool mc_in_progress;
>>>> +
>>>>  static void do_spr_sync(void *arg)
>>>>  {
>>>>      struct SPRSyncState *s = arg;
>>>> @@ -678,6 +681,19 @@ static target_ulong h_report_mc_err(PowerPCCPU *cpu, 
>>>> sPAPREnvironment *spapr,
>>>>      cpu_synchronize_state(CPU(ppc_env_get_cpu(env)));
>>>>  
>>>>      /*
>>>> +     * Only one VCPU can process machine check NMI at a time. Hence
>>>> +     * set the lock mc_in_progress. Once the VCPU finishes processing
>>>> +     * NMI, it executes ibm,nmi-interlock and mc_in_progress is unset
>>>> +     * in ibm,nmi-interlock handler. Meanwhile if other VCPUs encounter
>>>> +     * NMI we return 0 asking the VCPU to retry h_report_mc_err
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    if (mc_in_progress == 1) {
>>>
>>> Please don't depend on bools being numbers. Use true / false. For if()s,
>>> just don't use == at all - it makes it more readable.
>>
>> ok
>>
>>>
>>>> +        return 0;
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>> +    mc_in_progress = 1;
>>>> +
>>>> +    /*
>>>>       * We save the original r3 register in SPRG2 in 0x200 vector,
>>>>       * which is patched during call to ibm.nmi-register. Original
>>>>       * r3 is required to be included in error log
>>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
>>>> index 2ec2a8e..71c7662 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
>>>> @@ -36,6 +36,9 @@
>>>>  
>>>>  #include <libfdt.h>
>>>>  
>>>> +#define BRANCH_INST_MASK  0xFC000000
>>>> +extern bool mc_in_progress;
>>>
>>> Please put this into the spapr struct.
>>
>> ok
>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>>  static void rtas_display_character(PowerPCCPU *cpu, sPAPREnvironment 
>>>> *spapr,
>>>>                                     uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
>>>>                                     target_ulong args,
>>>> @@ -290,6 +293,90 @@ static void rtas_ibm_os_term(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
>>>>      rtas_st(rets, 0, ret);
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> +static void rtas_ibm_nmi_register(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
>>>> +                                  sPAPREnvironment *spapr,
>>>> +                                  uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
>>>> +                                  target_ulong args,
>>>> +                                  uint32_t nret, target_ulong rets)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    int i;
>>>> +    uint32_t ori_inst = 0x60630000;
>>>> +    uint32_t branch_inst = 0x48000002;
>>>> +    target_ulong guest_machine_check_addr;
>>>> +    uint32_t trampoline[TRAMPOLINE_INSTS];
>>>> +    int total_inst = sizeof(trampoline) / sizeof(uint32_t);
>>>
>>> ARRAY_SIZE(trampoline), though I don't quite understand why you need a
>>> variable that contains the same value as a constant (TRAMPOLINE_INSTS).
>>>
>>> But since you're moving all of those bits into variable fields on the
>>> rtas blob itself as we discussed in the last version, I guess this code
>>> will go away anyways ;).
>>
>> I think we still need this. We need to patch the KVMPPC_H_REPORT_MC_ERR
>> number and branch address in the trampoline and also, depending on
>> whether the guest running in LE/BE we may need to flip the bits in the
>> trampoline before copying it to 0x200 machine check vector.
>>
>> As rtas-blob is part of the guest memory I do not want to patch these in
>> rtas-blob, hence I copy the trampoline from the rtas-blob to an array,
>> modify accordingly and then move it to 0x200 machine check vector.
> 
> Yes, you will still need the array. But the array should be dynamically
> sized based on spapr->rtas_info->fwnmi_size which you extract from the
> blob on load.
> 
> That way you wouldn't need the "total_inst" variable anymore ;).

Yes, I will fix it that way.

> 
>>
>>>
>>>> +    PowerPCCPUClass *pcc = POWERPC_CPU_GET_CLASS(cpu);
>>>> +
>>>> +    /* Store the system reset and machine check address */
>>>> +    guest_machine_check_addr = rtas_ld(args, 1);
>>>
>>> Load or Store? I don't find the comment particularly useful either ;).
>>
>> will reword it or may delete it.
>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +    /*
>>>> +     * Read the trampoline instructions from RTAS Blob and patch
>>>> +     * the KVMPPC_H_REPORT_MC_ERR hcall number and the guest
>>>> +     * machine check address before copying to 0x200 vector
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    cpu_physical_memory_read(spapr->rtas_addr + RTAS_TRAMPOLINE_OFFSET,
>>>> +                             trampoline, sizeof(trampoline));
>>>> +
>>>> +    /* Safety Check */
>>>
>>> Same for this comment.
>>
>> we have only 0x100 bytes that can be copied at 0x200. If the trampoline
>> size exceeds then the next interrupt vector code is overwritten. Hence a
>> safety check during compile time to make sure trampoline is within 0x100
>> bytes.
> 
> I think the check is fine, the comment is just redundant with
> QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON. Either be more verbose in the comment or remove it

I will add above lines as comment.

> ;). But something a la
> 
>   /* check for failure */
>   BUG_ON(foo);
> 
> is useless redundancy, because everyone already knows that BUG_ON checks
> for failure.
> 
> The interesting bit is the why. Also, as a general rule of thumb, if you
> need a comment explaining the "what" of what you're doing, your function
> and/or variable names are probably not well chosen ;). But I don't think
> this is a problem here.
> 
> Thanks for the patches btw :)
> 
> 
> Alex
> 

-- 
Regards,
Aravinda