qemu-ppc
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 14/25] spapr: push the XIVE EQ data in OS event qu


From: David Gibson
Subject: Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 14/25] spapr: push the XIVE EQ data in OS event queue
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 15:10:15 +1100
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:16:30PM +0000, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 11/30/2017 04:49 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 02:29:44PM +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >> If a triggered event is let through, the Event Queue data defined in the
> >> associated IVE is pushed in the in-memory event queue. The latter is a
> >> circular buffer provided by the OS using the H_INT_SET_QUEUE_CONFIG hcall,
> >> one per server and priority couple. It is composed of Event Queue entries
> >> which are 4 bytes long, the first bit being a 'generation' bit and the 31
> >> following bits the EQ Data field.
> >>
> >> The EQ Data field provides a way to set an invariant logical event source
> >> number for an IRQ. It is set with the H_INT_SET_SOURCE_CONFIG hcall.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <address@hidden>
> >> ---
> >>  hw/intc/spapr_xive.c | 67 
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/intc/spapr_xive.c b/hw/intc/spapr_xive.c
> >> index 983317a6b3f6..df14c5a88275 100644
> >> --- a/hw/intc/spapr_xive.c
> >> +++ b/hw/intc/spapr_xive.c
> >> @@ -193,9 +193,76 @@ static sPAPRXiveICP *spapr_xive_icp_get(sPAPRXive 
> >> *xive, int server)
> >>      return cpu ? SPAPR_XIVE_ICP(cpu->intc) : NULL;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +static void spapr_xive_eq_push(XiveEQ *eq, uint32_t data)
> >> +{
> >> +    uint64_t qaddr_base = (((uint64_t)(eq->w2 & 0x0fffffff)) << 32) | 
> >> eq->w3;
> >> +    uint32_t qsize = GETFIELD(EQ_W0_QSIZE, eq->w0);
> >> +    uint32_t qindex = GETFIELD(EQ_W1_PAGE_OFF, eq->w1);
> >> +    uint32_t qgen = GETFIELD(EQ_W1_GENERATION, eq->w1);
> >> +
> >> +    uint64_t qaddr = qaddr_base + (qindex << 2);
> >> +    uint32_t qdata = cpu_to_be32((qgen << 31) | (data & 0x7fffffff));
> >> +    uint32_t qentries = 1 << (qsize + 10);
> >> +
> >> +    if (dma_memory_write(&address_space_memory, qaddr, &qdata, 
> >> sizeof(qdata))) {
> > 
> > This suggests that uint32_t data contains guest endian data, which it
> > generally shouldn't.  Better to use stl_be_dma() (or whatever is
> > appropriate for the endianness of the data field.
> 
> There are no requirement on the endianness of the data field and 
> it is just stored in the IVE in the hcall H_INT_SET_SOURCE_CONFIG. 
> So the guest can pass whatever it likes.  

Hm, ok.  Guest endian (or at least, not definitively host-endian) data
in a plain uint32_t makes me uncomfortable.  Could we use char data[4]
instead, to make it clear it's a byte-ordered buffer, rather than a
number as far as the XIVE is concerned.

Hm.. except that doesn't quite work, because the hardware must define
which end that generation bit ends up in...

> >> +        qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, "%s: failed to write EQ data @0x%"
> >> +                      HWADDR_PRIx "\n", __func__, qaddr);
> >> +        return;
> >> +    }
> >> +
> >> +    qindex = (qindex + 1) % qentries;
> >> +    if (qindex == 0) {
> >> +        qgen ^= 1;
> >> +        eq->w1 = SETFIELD(EQ_W1_GENERATION, eq->w1, qgen);
> >> +    }
> >> +    eq->w1 = SETFIELD(EQ_W1_PAGE_OFF, eq->w1, qindex);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>  static void spapr_xive_irq(sPAPRXive *xive, int lisn)
> >>  {
> >> +    XiveIVE *ive;
> >> +    XiveEQ *eq;
> >> +    uint32_t eq_idx;
> >> +    uint8_t priority;
> >> +
> >> +    ive = spapr_xive_get_ive(xive, lisn);
> >> +    if (!ive || !(ive->w & IVE_VALID)) {
> >> +        qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, "XIVE: invalid LISN %d\n", lisn);
> > 
> > As mentioned on other patches, I'm a little concerned by these
> > guest-triggerable logs.  I guess the LOG_GUEST_ERROR mask will save
> > us, though.
> 
> I want to track 'invalid' interrupts but I haven't seen these show up 
> in my tests. I agree there are a little too much and some could just 
> be asserts.

Uh.. I don't think many can be assert()s.  assert() is only
appropriate if it being tripped definitely indicates a bug in qemu.
Nearly all these qemu_log()s I've seen can be tripped by the guest
doing something bad, which absolutely should not assert() qemu.

-- 
David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
                                | _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]