Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-Dec-03 10:52 UTC
[PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:50:04AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:> On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 10:27:36 +0100 > Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck at de.ibm.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Dec 2014 21:03:45 +0200 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:41:36PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > void virtio_queue_set_num(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int num) > > > > { > > > > + /* > > > > + * For virtio-1 devices, the number of buffers may only be > > > > + * updated if the ring addresses have not yet been set up. > > > > > > Where does it say that? > > > > Hmpf, may have imagined that. > > > > This means we either need to track whether used/avail have been > > specified or calculated or move responsibility for re-calculation of > > used/avail for the old layout into the callers. > > What about this one instead?Looks ok overall - some questions below.> diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > index 43b7e02..1e2a720 100644 > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > @@ -244,9 +244,13 @@ static void virtio_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset, uint64_t value, > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUENUM: > DPRINTF("mmio_queue write %d max %d\n", (int)value, VIRTQUEUE_MAX_SIZE); > virtio_queue_set_num(vdev, vdev->queue_sel, value); > + /* Note: only call this function for legacy devices */ > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, vdev->queue_sel); > break; > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUEALIGN: > + /* Note: this is only valid for legacy devices */ > virtio_queue_set_align(vdev, vdev->queue_sel, value); > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, vdev->queue_sel); > break; > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUEPFN: > if (value == 0) {Let's just call virtio_queue_update_rings from virtio_queue_set_align?> diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio.c b/hw/virtio/virtio.c > index 8f69ffa..b2d553e 100644 > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio.c > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio.c > @@ -69,7 +69,6 @@ typedef struct VRing > struct VirtQueue > { > VRing vring; > - hwaddr pa; > uint16_t last_avail_idx; > /* Last used index value we have signalled on */ > uint16_t signalled_used; > @@ -92,15 +91,18 @@ struct VirtQueue > }; > > /* virt queue functions */ > -static void virtqueue_init(VirtQueue *vq) > +void virtio_queue_update_rings(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n) > { > - hwaddr pa = vq->pa; > + VRing *vring = &vdev->vq[n].vring; > > - vq->vring.desc = pa; > - vq->vring.avail = pa + vq->vring.num * sizeof(VRingDesc); > - vq->vring.used = vring_align(vq->vring.avail + > - offsetof(VRingAvail, ring[vq->vring.num]), > - vq->vring.align); > + if (!vring->desc) { > + /* not yet setup -> nothing to do */ > + return; > + } > + vring->avail = vring->desc + vring->num * sizeof(VRingDesc); > + vring->used = vring_align(vring->avail + > + offsetof(VRingAvail, ring[vring->num]), > + vring->align); > } > > static inline uint64_t vring_desc_addr(VirtIODevice *vdev, hwaddr desc_pa, > @@ -605,7 +607,6 @@ void virtio_reset(void *opaque) > vdev->vq[i].vring.avail = 0; > vdev->vq[i].vring.used = 0; > vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx = 0; > - vdev->vq[i].pa = 0; > vdev->vq[i].vector = VIRTIO_NO_VECTOR; > vdev->vq[i].signalled_used = 0; > vdev->vq[i].signalled_used_valid = false; > @@ -708,13 +709,21 @@ void virtio_config_writel(VirtIODevice *vdev, uint32_t addr, uint32_t data) > > void virtio_queue_set_addr(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, hwaddr addr) > { > - vdev->vq[n].pa = addr; > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[n]); > + vdev->vq[n].vring.desc = addr; > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, n); > } > > hwaddr virtio_queue_get_addr(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n) > { > - return vdev->vq[n].pa; > + return vdev->vq[n].vring.desc; > +} > + > +void virtio_queue_set_rings(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, hwaddr desc, > + hwaddr avail, hwaddr used) > +{ > + vdev->vq[n].vring.desc = desc; > + vdev->vq[n].vring.avail = avail; > + vdev->vq[n].vring.used = used; > } > > void virtio_queue_set_num(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int num) > @@ -728,7 +737,6 @@ void virtio_queue_set_num(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int num) > return; > } > vdev->vq[n].vring.num = num; > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[n]); > } > > int virtio_queue_get_num(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n) > @@ -748,6 +756,11 @@ void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align) > BusState *qbus = qdev_get_parent_bus(DEVICE(vdev)); > VirtioBusClass *k = VIRTIO_BUS_GET_CLASS(qbus); > > + /* virtio-1 compliant devices cannot change the aligment */ > + if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) { > + error_report("tried to modify queue alignment for virtio-1 device"); > + return; > + } > /* Check that the transport told us it was going to do this > * (so a buggy transport will immediately assert rather than > * silently failing to migrate this state)Do we have to touch this now? It's only used by MMIO, right?> @@ -755,7 +768,6 @@ void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align) > assert(k->has_variable_vring_alignment); > > vdev->vq[n].vring.align = align; > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[n]);Don't we need to update rings?> } > > void virtio_queue_notify_vq(VirtQueue *vq) > @@ -949,7 +961,8 @@ void virtio_save(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f) > if (k->has_variable_vring_alignment) { > qemu_put_be32(f, vdev->vq[i].vring.align); > } > - qemu_put_be64(f, vdev->vq[i].pa); > + /* XXX virtio-1 devices */ > + qemu_put_be64(f, vdev->vq[i].vring.desc); > qemu_put_be16s(f, &vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx); > if (k->save_queue) { > k->save_queue(qbus->parent, i, f); > @@ -1044,13 +1057,14 @@ int virtio_load(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f, int version_id) > if (k->has_variable_vring_alignment) { > vdev->vq[i].vring.align = qemu_get_be32(f); > } > - vdev->vq[i].pa = qemu_get_be64(f); > + vdev->vq[i].vring.desc = qemu_get_be64(f); > qemu_get_be16s(f, &vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx); > vdev->vq[i].signalled_used_valid = false; > vdev->vq[i].notification = true; > > - if (vdev->vq[i].pa) { > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[i]); > + if (vdev->vq[i].vring.desc) { > + /* XXX virtio-1 devices */What does XXX mean here?> + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, i); > } else if (vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx) { > error_report("VQ %d address 0x0 " > "inconsistent with Host index 0x%x", > @@ -1084,7 +1098,7 @@ int virtio_load(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f, int version_id) > } > > for (i = 0; i < num; i++) { > - if (vdev->vq[i].pa) { > + if (vdev->vq[i].vring.desc) { > uint16_t nheads; > nheads = vring_avail_idx(&vdev->vq[i]) - vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx; > /* Check it isn't doing strange things with descriptor numbers. */ > diff --git a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h > index 68c40db..b63ced3 100644 > --- a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h > +++ b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h > @@ -224,6 +224,9 @@ void virtio_queue_set_addr(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, hwaddr addr); > hwaddr virtio_queue_get_addr(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n); > void virtio_queue_set_num(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int num); > int virtio_queue_get_num(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n); > +void virtio_queue_set_rings(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, hwaddr desc, > + hwaddr avail, hwaddr used); > +void virtio_queue_update_rings(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n); > void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align); > void virtio_queue_notify(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n); > uint16_t virtio_queue_vector(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n);
Cornelia Huck
2014-Dec-03 11:14 UTC
[PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 12:52:51 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:> On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:50:04AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:> > diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > > index 43b7e02..1e2a720 100644 > > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > > @@ -244,9 +244,13 @@ static void virtio_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset, uint64_t value, > > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUENUM: > > DPRINTF("mmio_queue write %d max %d\n", (int)value, VIRTQUEUE_MAX_SIZE); > > virtio_queue_set_num(vdev, vdev->queue_sel, value); > > + /* Note: only call this function for legacy devices */ > > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, vdev->queue_sel); > > break; > > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUEALIGN: > > + /* Note: this is only valid for legacy devices */ > > virtio_queue_set_align(vdev, vdev->queue_sel, value); > > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, vdev->queue_sel); > > break; > > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUEPFN: > > if (value == 0) { > > Let's just call virtio_queue_update_rings from virtio_queue_set_align?You're right, set_align is legacy only so we can always call update_rings.> > @@ -748,6 +756,11 @@ void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align) > > BusState *qbus = qdev_get_parent_bus(DEVICE(vdev)); > > VirtioBusClass *k = VIRTIO_BUS_GET_CLASS(qbus); > > > > + /* virtio-1 compliant devices cannot change the aligment */ > > + if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) { > > + error_report("tried to modify queue alignment for virtio-1 device"); > > + return; > > + } > > /* Check that the transport told us it was going to do this > > * (so a buggy transport will immediately assert rather than > > * silently failing to migrate this state) > > Do we have to touch this now? > It's only used by MMIO, right?I don't think it hurts to put a guard in here.> > > > @@ -755,7 +768,6 @@ void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align) > > assert(k->has_variable_vring_alignment); > > > > vdev->vq[n].vring.align = align; > > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[n]); > > Don't we need to update rings?See above, I'll call update_rings in there.> > > } > > > > void virtio_queue_notify_vq(VirtQueue *vq) > > @@ -949,7 +961,8 @@ void virtio_save(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f) > > if (k->has_variable_vring_alignment) { > > qemu_put_be32(f, vdev->vq[i].vring.align); > > } > > - qemu_put_be64(f, vdev->vq[i].pa); > > + /* XXX virtio-1 devices */ > > + qemu_put_be64(f, vdev->vq[i].vring.desc); > > qemu_put_be16s(f, &vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx); > > if (k->save_queue) { > > k->save_queue(qbus->parent, i, f); > > @@ -1044,13 +1057,14 @@ int virtio_load(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f, int version_id) > > if (k->has_variable_vring_alignment) { > > vdev->vq[i].vring.align = qemu_get_be32(f); > > } > > - vdev->vq[i].pa = qemu_get_be64(f); > > + vdev->vq[i].vring.desc = qemu_get_be64(f); > > qemu_get_be16s(f, &vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx); > > vdev->vq[i].signalled_used_valid = false; > > vdev->vq[i].notification = true; > > > > - if (vdev->vq[i].pa) { > > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[i]); > > + if (vdev->vq[i].vring.desc) { > > + /* XXX virtio-1 devices */ > > What does XXX mean here?That I have not cared about migration of virtio-1 devices yet :)> > > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, i); > > } else if (vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx) { > > error_report("VQ %d address 0x0 " > > "inconsistent with Host index 0x%x",
Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-Dec-03 11:19 UTC
[PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 12:14:10PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:> On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 12:52:51 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:50:04AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > > > index 43b7e02..1e2a720 100644 > > > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > > > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c > > > @@ -244,9 +244,13 @@ static void virtio_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset, uint64_t value, > > > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUENUM: > > > DPRINTF("mmio_queue write %d max %d\n", (int)value, VIRTQUEUE_MAX_SIZE); > > > virtio_queue_set_num(vdev, vdev->queue_sel, value); > > > + /* Note: only call this function for legacy devices */ > > > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, vdev->queue_sel); > > > break; > > > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUEALIGN: > > > + /* Note: this is only valid for legacy devices */ > > > virtio_queue_set_align(vdev, vdev->queue_sel, value); > > > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, vdev->queue_sel); > > > break; > > > case VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUEPFN: > > > if (value == 0) { > > > > Let's just call virtio_queue_update_rings from virtio_queue_set_align? > > You're right, set_align is legacy only so we can always call > update_rings. > > > > > @@ -748,6 +756,11 @@ void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align) > > > BusState *qbus = qdev_get_parent_bus(DEVICE(vdev)); > > > VirtioBusClass *k = VIRTIO_BUS_GET_CLASS(qbus); > > > > > > + /* virtio-1 compliant devices cannot change the aligment */ > > > + if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) { > > > + error_report("tried to modify queue alignment for virtio-1 device"); > > > + return; > > > + } > > > /* Check that the transport told us it was going to do this > > > * (so a buggy transport will immediately assert rather than > > > * silently failing to migrate this state) > > > > Do we have to touch this now? > > It's only used by MMIO, right? > > I don't think it hurts to put a guard in here.I'd say let's not touch mmio ATM.> > > > > > > @@ -755,7 +768,6 @@ void virtio_queue_set_align(VirtIODevice *vdev, int n, int align) > > > assert(k->has_variable_vring_alignment); > > > > > > vdev->vq[n].vring.align = align; > > > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[n]); > > > > Don't we need to update rings? > > See above, I'll call update_rings in there. > > > > > > } > > > > > > void virtio_queue_notify_vq(VirtQueue *vq) > > > @@ -949,7 +961,8 @@ void virtio_save(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f) > > > if (k->has_variable_vring_alignment) { > > > qemu_put_be32(f, vdev->vq[i].vring.align); > > > } > > > - qemu_put_be64(f, vdev->vq[i].pa); > > > + /* XXX virtio-1 devices */ > > > + qemu_put_be64(f, vdev->vq[i].vring.desc); > > > qemu_put_be16s(f, &vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx); > > > if (k->save_queue) { > > > k->save_queue(qbus->parent, i, f); > > > @@ -1044,13 +1057,14 @@ int virtio_load(VirtIODevice *vdev, QEMUFile *f, int version_id) > > > if (k->has_variable_vring_alignment) { > > > vdev->vq[i].vring.align = qemu_get_be32(f); > > > } > > > - vdev->vq[i].pa = qemu_get_be64(f); > > > + vdev->vq[i].vring.desc = qemu_get_be64(f); > > > qemu_get_be16s(f, &vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx); > > > vdev->vq[i].signalled_used_valid = false; > > > vdev->vq[i].notification = true; > > > > > > - if (vdev->vq[i].pa) { > > > - virtqueue_init(&vdev->vq[i]); > > > + if (vdev->vq[i].vring.desc) { > > > + /* XXX virtio-1 devices */ > > > > What does XXX mean here? > > That I have not cared about migration of virtio-1 devices yet :)OK sure, but why put comment here not at start of function?> > > > > + virtio_queue_update_rings(vdev, i); > > > } else if (vdev->vq[i].last_avail_idx) { > > > error_report("VQ %d address 0x0 " > > > "inconsistent with Host index 0x%x",
Seemingly Similar Threads
- [PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
- [PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
- [PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
- [PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout
- [PATCH RFC v5 07/19] virtio: allow virtio-1 queue layout