| Message ID | 20240913-reuse-v16-4-d016b4b4f616@daynix.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | hw/pci: SR-IOV related fixes and improvements | expand |
Hello, On 9/13/24 05:44, Akihiko Odaki wrote: > VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will > result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support > multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> > --- > hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, > > pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); > if (!pbdev) { > + /* > + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them > + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not > + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs > + * anyway. > + */ > + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { > + return; > + } > + > pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); > if (!pbdev) { > return; > @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, > int32_t devfn; > > pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); > - g_assert(pbdev); > + if (!pbdev) { > + return; > + } I don't understand this change. Could you please explain ? Thanks, C. > s390_pci_generate_plug_event(HP_EVENT_STANDBY_TO_RESERVED, > pbdev->fh, pbdev->fid); > @@ -1206,7 +1218,10 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug_request(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, > * we've checked the PCI device already (to prevent endless recursion). > */ > pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); > - g_assert(pbdev); > + if (!pbdev) { > + return; > + } > + > pbdev->pci_unplug_request_processed = true; > qdev_unplug(DEVICE(pbdev), errp); > } else if (object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(dev), TYPE_S390_PCI_DEVICE)) { >
On 2024/09/18 17:02, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > Hello, > > On 9/13/24 05:44, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >> VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will >> result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support >> multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. >> >> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> >> --- >> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >> index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 >> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >> @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler >> *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); >> if (!pbdev) { >> + /* >> + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci >> for them >> + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently >> QEMU does not >> + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci >> for VFs >> + * anyway. >> + */ >> + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { >> + return; >> + } >> + >> pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); >> if (!pbdev) { >> return; >> @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler >> *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >> int32_t devfn; >> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); >> - g_assert(pbdev); >> + if (!pbdev) { >> + return; >> + } > > > I don't understand this change. Could you please explain ? We need to tolerate that pbdev being NULL because VFs do no longer have zpci and pbdev will be NULL for them. Regards, Akihiko Odaki
Hello Akihiko, Sorry for the late reply. On 9/18/24 17:32, Akihiko Odaki wrote: > On 2024/09/18 17:02, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >> Hello, >> >> On 9/13/24 05:44, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >>> VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will >>> result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support >>> multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> >>> --- >>> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>> index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 >>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>> @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); >>> if (!pbdev) { >>> + /* >>> + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them >>> + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not >>> + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs >>> + * anyway. >>> + */ >>> + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { >>> + return; >>> + } >>> + >>> pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); >>> if (!pbdev) { >>> return; >>> @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>> int32_t devfn; >>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); >>> - g_assert(pbdev); >>> + if (!pbdev) { >>> + return; >>> + } >> >> >> I don't understand this change. Could you please explain ? > > We need to tolerate that pbdev being NULL because VFs do no longer have zpci and pbdev will be NULL for them. Then, I think we should extend the assert with a check on pci_is_vf(pdev) to be symmetric with the plug handler and also, use the 'Error**' parameter to report an error. Thanks, C. > > Regards, > Akihiko Odaki >
On 2024/10/11 0:44, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > Hello Akihiko, > > Sorry for the late reply. > > On 9/18/24 17:32, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >> On 2024/09/18 17:02, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> On 9/13/24 05:44, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >>>> VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will >>>> result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support >>>> multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> >>>> --- >>>> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>> index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>> @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler >>>> *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); >>>> if (!pbdev) { >>>> + /* >>>> + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating >>>> zpci for them >>>> + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently >>>> QEMU does not >>>> + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need >>>> zpci for VFs >>>> + * anyway. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { >>>> + return; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); >>>> if (!pbdev) { >>>> return; >>>> @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler >>>> *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>>> int32_t devfn; >>>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); >>>> - g_assert(pbdev); >>>> + if (!pbdev) { >>>> + return; >>>> + } >>> >>> >>> I don't understand this change. Could you please explain ? >> >> We need to tolerate that pbdev being NULL because VFs do no longer >> have zpci and pbdev will be NULL for them. > > Then, I think we should extend the assert with a check on pci_is_vf(pdev) > to be symmetric with the plug handler and also, use the 'Error**' parameter > to report an error. This should never happen unless there is a programming error so plain g_assert() without error reporting should be fine. We don't need to report an error when it is VF; we just don't have a work to do and nothing wrong happens here. Regards, Akihiko Odaki > > Thanks, > > C. > > > > >> >> Regards, >> Akihiko Odaki >> >
Hello Akihiko, On 10/12/24 13:05, Akihiko Odaki wrote: > On 2024/10/11 0:44, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >> Hello Akihiko, >> >> Sorry for the late reply. >> >> On 9/18/24 17:32, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >>> On 2024/09/18 17:02, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> On 9/13/24 05:44, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >>>>> VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will >>>>> result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support >>>>> multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >>>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>>> index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 >>>>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>>> @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>>>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); >>>>> if (!pbdev) { >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them >>>>> + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not >>>>> + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs >>>>> + * anyway. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { >>>>> + return; >>>>> + } >>>>> + >>>>> pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); >>>>> if (!pbdev) { >>>>> return; >>>>> @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>>>> int32_t devfn; >>>>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); >>>>> - g_assert(pbdev); >>>>> + if (!pbdev) { >>>>> + return; >>>>> + } >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't understand this change. Could you please explain ? >>> >>> We need to tolerate that pbdev being NULL because VFs do no longer have zpci and pbdev will be NULL for them. >> >> Then, I think we should extend the assert with a check on pci_is_vf(pdev) >> to be symmetric with the plug handler and also, use the 'Error**' parameter >> to report an error. > > This should never happen unless there is a programming error so plain g_assert() without error reporting should be fine. We don't need to report an error when it is VF; we just don't have a work to do and nothing wrong happens here. unplugging a VF is still an invalid thing to do, reporting an error is preferable IMO. Thanks, C.
On 2024/10/14 17:43, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > Hello Akihiko, > > On 10/12/24 13:05, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >> On 2024/10/11 0:44, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >>> Hello Akihiko, >>> >>> Sorry for the late reply. >>> >>> On 9/18/24 17:32, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >>>> On 2024/09/18 17:02, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> On 9/13/24 05:44, Akihiko Odaki wrote: >>>>>> VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will >>>>>> result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support >>>>>> multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>>>> index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 >>>>>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>>>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c >>>>>> @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void >>>>>> s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>>>>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); >>>>>> if (!pbdev) { >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating >>>>>> zpci for them >>>>>> + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently >>>>>> QEMU does not >>>>>> + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need >>>>>> zpci for VFs >>>>>> + * anyway. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { >>>>>> + return; >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + >>>>>> pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); >>>>>> if (!pbdev) { >>>>>> return; >>>>>> @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void >>>>>> s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, >>>>>> int32_t devfn; >>>>>> pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); >>>>>> - g_assert(pbdev); >>>>>> + if (!pbdev) { >>>>>> + return; >>>>>> + } >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand this change. Could you please explain ? >>>> >>>> We need to tolerate that pbdev being NULL because VFs do no longer >>>> have zpci and pbdev will be NULL for them. >>> >>> Then, I think we should extend the assert with a check on >>> pci_is_vf(pdev) >>> to be symmetric with the plug handler and also, use the 'Error**' >>> parameter >>> to report an error. >> >> This should never happen unless there is a programming error so plain >> g_assert() without error reporting should be fine. We don't need to >> report an error when it is VF; we just don't have a work to do and >> nothing wrong happens here. > > unplugging a VF is still an invalid thing to do, reporting an error is > preferable IMO. Unplugging a VF will happen if you unplug igb, and it is a valid operation. Regards, Akihiko Odaki
diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c index 3e57d5faca18..1a620f5b2a04 100644 --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c @@ -1080,6 +1080,16 @@ static void s390_pcihost_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_target(s, dev->id); if (!pbdev) { + /* + * VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them + * will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not + * support multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs + * anyway. + */ + if (pci_is_vf(pdev)) { + return; + } + pbdev = s390_pci_device_new(s, dev->id, errp); if (!pbdev) { return; @@ -1167,7 +1177,9 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, DeviceState *dev, int32_t devfn; pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); - g_assert(pbdev); + if (!pbdev) { + return; + } s390_pci_generate_plug_event(HP_EVENT_STANDBY_TO_RESERVED, pbdev->fh, pbdev->fid); @@ -1206,7 +1218,10 @@ static void s390_pcihost_unplug_request(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, * we've checked the PCI device already (to prevent endless recursion). */ pbdev = s390_pci_find_dev_by_pci(s, PCI_DEVICE(dev)); - g_assert(pbdev); + if (!pbdev) { + return; + } + pbdev->pci_unplug_request_processed = true; qdev_unplug(DEVICE(pbdev), errp); } else if (object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(dev), TYPE_S390_PCI_DEVICE)) {
VFs are automatically created by PF, and creating zpci for them will result in unexpected usage of fids. Currently QEMU does not support multifunction for s390x so we don't need zpci for VFs anyway. Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com> --- hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)