| Message ID | 20230526121006.76388-1-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | hw/riscv/virt: pflash improvements | expand |
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 05:40:03PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote: > This series improves the pflash usage in RISC-V virt machine with solutions to > below issues. > > 1) Currently the first pflash is reserved for ROM/M-mode firmware code. But S-mode > payload firmware like EDK2 need both pflash devices to have separate code and variable > store so that OS distros can keep the FW code as read-only. > > The issue is reported at > https://salsa.debian.org/qemu-team/edk2/-/commit/c345655a0149f64c5020bfc1e53c619ce60587f6 > > 2) The latest way of using pflash devices in other architectures and libvirt > is by using -blockdev and machine options. However, currently this method is > not working in RISC-V. > > With above issues fixed, added documentation on how to use pflash devices > in RISC-V virt machine. > > This patch series is based on Alistair's riscv-to-apply.next branch. > > Changes since v4: > 1) Updated patch 2 to avoid accessing private field as per feedback from Philippe. > 2) Updated documentation patch to add read-only for ROM usage. > 3) Rebased to latest riscv-to-apply.next branch and updated tags. Still works great :) Tested-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 5:41 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > This series improves the pflash usage in RISC-V virt machine with solutions to > below issues. > > 1) Currently the first pflash is reserved for ROM/M-mode firmware code. But S-mode > payload firmware like EDK2 need both pflash devices to have separate code and variable > store so that OS distros can keep the FW code as read-only. > > The issue is reported at > https://salsa.debian.org/qemu-team/edk2/-/commit/c345655a0149f64c5020bfc1e53c619ce60587f6 > > 2) The latest way of using pflash devices in other architectures and libvirt > is by using -blockdev and machine options. However, currently this method is > not working in RISC-V. > > With above issues fixed, added documentation on how to use pflash devices > in RISC-V virt machine. > > This patch series is based on Alistair's riscv-to-apply.next branch. > > Changes since v4: > 1) Updated patch 2 to avoid accessing private field as per feedback from Philippe. > 2) Updated documentation patch to add read-only for ROM usage. > 3) Rebased to latest riscv-to-apply.next branch and updated tags. > > Changes since v3: > 1) Converted single patch to a series with a cover letter since there are > multiple patches now. > 2) Added a new patch to enable pflash usage via -blockdev option. > 3) Separated the documentation change into new patch and updated the > documentation to mention only -blockdev option which seems to be the > recommended way of using pflash. > > Changes since v2: > 1) Reverted v2 changes and used v1 approach so that pflash0 can be used > for code and pflash1 for variable store. > 2) Rebased to latest riscv-to-apply.next branch. > 3) Added documentation for pflash usage. > > Changes since v1: > 1) Simplified the fix such that it doesn't break current EDK2. > > Sunil V L (3): > hw/riscv: virt: Assume M-mode FW in pflash0 only when "-bios none" > riscv/virt: Support using pflash via -blockdev option > docs/system: riscv: Add pflash usage details In case of KVM guests, there is no M-mode so pflash0 will always contain S-mode FW. I suggest improving this series to consider KVM guests as well such that the same EDK2 S-mode works for KVM and TCG guests. Regards, Anup > > docs/system/riscv/virt.rst | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++ > hw/riscv/virt.c | 56 +++++++++++++++----------------------- > 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.34.1 > >
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 10:46:17AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 5:41 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > hw/riscv: virt: Assume M-mode FW in pflash0 only when "-bios none" > > riscv/virt: Support using pflash via -blockdev option > > docs/system: riscv: Add pflash usage details > > In case of KVM guests, there is no M-mode so pflash0 will always > contain S-mode FW. > > I suggest improving this series to consider KVM guests as well > such that the same EDK2 S-mode works for KVM and TCG guests. After these patches are applied, pflash0 is assumed to contain S-mode code *unless* you go out of your way and add -bios none to the command line. It seems to me that this default behavior will work fine for KVM guests too, based on what you wrote above. Isn't that the case?
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 04:34:58AM -0700, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 10:46:17AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > > On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 5:41 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > > hw/riscv: virt: Assume M-mode FW in pflash0 only when "-bios none" > > > riscv/virt: Support using pflash via -blockdev option > > > docs/system: riscv: Add pflash usage details > > > > In case of KVM guests, there is no M-mode so pflash0 will always > > contain S-mode FW. > > > > I suggest improving this series to consider KVM guests as well > > such that the same EDK2 S-mode works for KVM and TCG guests. > > After these patches are applied, pflash0 is assumed to contain S-mode > code *unless* you go out of your way and add -bios none to the > command line. > > It seems to me that this default behavior will work fine for KVM > guests too, based on what you wrote above. Isn't that the case? > Hi Andrea, Actually, KVM boot is supported if the user passes -bios none. Even if the user doesn't pass -bios at all, the code will itself add none. So, in either case, it satisfies the condition for ROM/M-mode firmware code and pflash0 will be assumed to have M-mode firmware code. To resolve this, I need to add !kvm_enabled() check also while checking for pflash0. I have made the changes and tested with KVM and KVM guest also boots with EDK2 now!. Let me send the next revision with this update. Thanks Anup for pointing this use case also. Thanks, Sunil