[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB527639DBE4C433542F351F6D8C8BA@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2023 08:47:48 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "cohuck@...hat.com" <cohuck@...hat.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"nicolinc@...dia.com" <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
"chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
"yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>,
"peterx@...hat.com" <peterx@...hat.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
"lulu@...hat.com" <lulu@...hat.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"Duan, Zhenzhong" <zhenzhong.duan@...el.com>,
"joao.m.martins@...cle.com" <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
"Zeng, Xin" <xin.zeng@...el.com>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/3] vfio: Report PASID capability via VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE
ioctl
> From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 2:39 PM
>
> +static int vfio_pci_core_feature_pasid(struct vfio_device *device, u32 flags,
> + struct vfio_device_feature_pasid __user
> *arg,
> + size_t argsz)
> +{
> + struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev =
> + container_of(device, struct vfio_pci_core_device, vdev);
> + struct vfio_device_feature_pasid pasid = { 0 };
> + struct pci_dev *pdev = vdev->pdev;
> + u32 capabilities = 0;
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* We do not support SET of the PASID capability */
this line alone is meaningless. Please explain the reason e.g. due to
no PASID capability per VF...
> + ret = vfio_check_feature(flags, argsz, VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_GET,
> + sizeof(pasid));
> + if (ret != 1)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /*
> + * Needs go to PF if the device is VF as VF shares its PF's
> + * PASID Capability.
> + */
/* VF shares the PASID capability of its PF */
> + if (pdev->is_virtfn)
> + pdev = pci_physfn(pdev);
> +
> + if (!pdev->pasid_enabled)
> + goto out;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_PASID
> + pci_read_config_dword(pdev, pdev->pasid_cap + PCI_PASID_CAP,
> + &capabilities);
> +#endif
#ifdef is unnecessary. If CONFIG_PCI_PASID is false pdev->pasid_enabled
won't be set anyway.
and it should read from PCI_PASID_CTRL which indicates whether a
capability is actually enabled.
> +/**
> + * Upon VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_GET, return the PASID capability for the
> device.
> + * Zero width means no support for PASID.
also mention the encoding of this field according to PCIe spec.
or turn it to a plain number field.
> + */
> +struct vfio_device_feature_pasid {
> + __u16 capabilities;
> +#define VFIO_DEVICE_PASID_CAP_EXEC (1 << 0)
> +#define VFIO_DEVICE_PASID_CAP_PRIV (1 << 1)
> + __u8 width;
> + __u8 __reserved;
> +};
> +#define VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_PASID 11
> +
> /* -------- API for Type1 VFIO IOMMU -------- */
>
> /**
> --
> 2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists