| Message ID | 20231026103104.1686921-30-zhenzhong.duan@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | vfio: Adopt iommufd | expand |
On 10/26/23 12:30, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: > IBM EEH is only supported by legacy backend currently, bypass it > for IOMMUFD backend. > > Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@intel.com> > --- > hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c > index d1d07bec46..a2518838a1 100644 > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c > @@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static VFIOContainer *vfio_eeh_as_container(AddressSpace *as) > > bcontainer = QLIST_FIRST(&space->containers); > > - if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next)) { > + if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next) || bcontainer->ops != &vfio_legacy_ops) { It's curious that a test on the VFIOIOMMUOps is needed so deep in the software stack, and spapr should have its own VFIOIOMMUOps, which de facto doesn't support iommufd. Thanks, C. > /* > * We don't yet have logic to synchronize EEH state across > - * multiple containers > + * multiple containers, iommufd isn't supported too. > */ > bcontainer = NULL; > goto out;
>-----Original Message----- >From: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com> >Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 9:57 PM >Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 29/37] vfio/iommufd: Bypass EEH if iommufd backend > >On 10/26/23 12:30, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: >> IBM EEH is only supported by legacy backend currently, bypass it >> for IOMMUFD backend. >> >> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@intel.com> >> --- >> hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >> index d1d07bec46..a2518838a1 100644 >> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >> @@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static VFIOContainer >*vfio_eeh_as_container(AddressSpace *as) >> >> bcontainer = QLIST_FIRST(&space->containers); >> >> - if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next)) { >> + if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next) || bcontainer->ops != &vfio_legacy_ops) { > >It's curious that a test on the VFIOIOMMUOps is needed so deep in >the software stack, and spapr should have its own VFIOIOMMUOps, which >de facto doesn't support iommufd. Yes, in this series, spapr shares same ops vfio_legacy_ops, in next series I should check with vfio_iommu_spapr_ops. The general vfio-pci device supports iommu property, if we pass a vfio device with iommufd backend, I guess we will crash Qemu if there is no check here. Thanks Zhenzhong
On 10/31/23 03:26, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com> >> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 9:57 PM >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 29/37] vfio/iommufd: Bypass EEH if iommufd backend >> >> On 10/26/23 12:30, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: >>> IBM EEH is only supported by legacy backend currently, bypass it >>> for IOMMUFD backend. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@intel.com> >>> --- >>> hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >>> index d1d07bec46..a2518838a1 100644 >>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >>> @@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static VFIOContainer >> *vfio_eeh_as_container(AddressSpace *as) >>> >>> bcontainer = QLIST_FIRST(&space->containers); >>> >>> - if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next)) { >>> + if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next) || bcontainer->ops != &vfio_legacy_ops) { >> >> It's curious that a test on the VFIOIOMMUOps is needed so deep in >> the software stack, and spapr should have its own VFIOIOMMUOps, which >> de facto doesn't support iommufd. > > Yes, in this series, spapr shares same ops vfio_legacy_ops, in next series I should > check with vfio_iommu_spapr_ops. Well, since PPC doesn't support IOMMUFD it should be tested before or compile out as suggested on patch 23 "Add iommufd configure option" Thanks, C. > The general vfio-pci device supports iommu property, if we pass a vfio device > with iommufd backend, I guess we will crash Qemu if there is no check here. > > Thanks > Zhenzhong >
>-----Original Message----- >From: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com> >Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 5:01 PM >Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 29/37] vfio/iommufd: Bypass EEH if iommufd backend > >On 10/31/23 03:26, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote: >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com> >>> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 9:57 PM >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 29/37] vfio/iommufd: Bypass EEH if iommufd backend >>> >>> On 10/26/23 12:30, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: >>>> IBM EEH is only supported by legacy backend currently, bypass it >>>> for IOMMUFD backend. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@intel.com> >>>> --- >>>> hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c | 4 ++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >>>> index d1d07bec46..a2518838a1 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c >>>> @@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static VFIOContainer >>> *vfio_eeh_as_container(AddressSpace *as) >>>> >>>> bcontainer = QLIST_FIRST(&space->containers); >>>> >>>> - if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next)) { >>>> + if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next) || bcontainer->ops != &vfio_legacy_ops) >{ >>> >>> It's curious that a test on the VFIOIOMMUOps is needed so deep in >>> the software stack, and spapr should have its own VFIOIOMMUOps, which >>> de facto doesn't support iommufd. >> >> Yes, in this series, spapr shares same ops vfio_legacy_ops, in next series I >should >> check with vfio_iommu_spapr_ops. > >Well, since PPC doesn't support IOMMUFD it should be tested before or compile >out as suggested on patch 23 "Add iommufd configure option" Got it, I'll disabled it for PPC as you suggested. Thanks Zhenzhong > >Thanks, > >C. > > >> The general vfio-pci device supports iommu property, if we pass a vfio device >> with iommufd backend, I guess we will crash Qemu if there is no check here. >> >> Thanks >> Zhenzhong >>
diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c index d1d07bec46..a2518838a1 100644 --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c @@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static VFIOContainer *vfio_eeh_as_container(AddressSpace *as) bcontainer = QLIST_FIRST(&space->containers); - if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next)) { + if (QLIST_NEXT(bcontainer, next) || bcontainer->ops != &vfio_legacy_ops) { /* * We don't yet have logic to synchronize EEH state across - * multiple containers + * multiple containers, iommufd isn't supported too. */ bcontainer = NULL; goto out;
IBM EEH is only supported by legacy backend currently, bypass it for IOMMUFD backend. Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@intel.com> --- hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)