All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
	Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
	Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
	Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:57:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190409115743.26e51b81.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190404231622.52531-3-pasic@linux.ibm.com>

On Fri,  5 Apr 2019 01:16:12 +0200
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Currently we have a problem if a virtio-ccw device has
> VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. 

Can you please describe what the actual problem is?

> In future we do want to support DMA API with
> virtio-ccw.
> 
> Let us do the plumbing, so the feature VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM works
> with virtio-ccw.
> 
> Let us also switch from legacy avail/used accessors to the DMA aware
> ones (even if it isn't strictly necessary).

I think with this change we can remove the legacy accessors, if I
didn't mis-grep.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> index edf4afe2d688..5956c9e820bb 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ struct virtio_ccw_device {
>  	bool device_lost;
>  	unsigned int config_ready;
>  	void *airq_info;
> +	__u64 dma_mask;

u64?

>  };
>  
>  struct vq_info_block_legacy {
> @@ -536,8 +537,8 @@ static struct virtqueue *virtio_ccw_setup_vq(struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  		info->info_block->s.desc = queue;
>  		info->info_block->s.index = i;
>  		info->info_block->s.num = info->num;
> -		info->info_block->s.avail = (__u64)virtqueue_get_avail(vq);
> -		info->info_block->s.used = (__u64)virtqueue_get_used(vq);
> +		info->info_block->s.avail = (__u64)virtqueue_get_avail_addr(vq);
> +		info->info_block->s.used = (__u64)virtqueue_get_used_addr(vq);
>  		ccw->count = sizeof(info->info_block->s);
>  	}
>  	ccw->cmd_code = CCW_CMD_SET_VQ;
> @@ -769,10 +770,8 @@ static u64 virtio_ccw_get_features(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>  static void ccw_transport_features(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>  {
>  	/*
> -	 * Packed ring isn't enabled on virtio_ccw for now,
> -	 * because virtio_ccw uses some legacy accessors,
> -	 * e.g. virtqueue_get_avail() and virtqueue_get_used()
> -	 * which aren't available in packed ring currently.
> +	 * There shouldn't be anything that precludes supporting paced.

s/paced/packed/

> +	 * TODO: Remove the limitation after having another look into this.
>  	 */
>  	__virtio_clear_bit(vdev, VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED);
>  }
> @@ -1255,6 +1254,18 @@ static int virtio_ccw_online(struct ccw_device *cdev)
>  		ret = -ENOMEM;
>  		goto out_free;
>  	}
> +	vcdev->vdev.dev.parent = &cdev->dev;

That one makes sense, pci and mmio are doing that as well.

> +	cdev->dev.dma_mask = &vcdev->dma_mask;

That one feels a bit weird. Will this change in one of the follow-on
patches? (Have not yet looked at the whole series.)

> +
> +	ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
> +	if (ret)
> +		ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev,
> +						DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_warn(&cdev->dev, "Failed to enable 64-bit or 32-bit DMA.  Trying to continue, but this might not work.\n");

This does not look like you'd try to continue?

> +		goto out_free;
> +	}
> +
>  	vcdev->config_block = kzalloc(sizeof(*vcdev->config_block),
>  				   GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!vcdev->config_block) {

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>,
	Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>,
	Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:57:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190409115743.26e51b81.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190404231622.52531-3-pasic@linux.ibm.com>

On Fri,  5 Apr 2019 01:16:12 +0200
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Currently we have a problem if a virtio-ccw device has
> VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. 

Can you please describe what the actual problem is?

> In future we do want to support DMA API with
> virtio-ccw.
> 
> Let us do the plumbing, so the feature VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM works
> with virtio-ccw.
> 
> Let us also switch from legacy avail/used accessors to the DMA aware
> ones (even if it isn't strictly necessary).

I think with this change we can remove the legacy accessors, if I
didn't mis-grep.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> index edf4afe2d688..5956c9e820bb 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ struct virtio_ccw_device {
>  	bool device_lost;
>  	unsigned int config_ready;
>  	void *airq_info;
> +	__u64 dma_mask;

u64?

>  };
>  
>  struct vq_info_block_legacy {
> @@ -536,8 +537,8 @@ static struct virtqueue *virtio_ccw_setup_vq(struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  		info->info_block->s.desc = queue;
>  		info->info_block->s.index = i;
>  		info->info_block->s.num = info->num;
> -		info->info_block->s.avail = (__u64)virtqueue_get_avail(vq);
> -		info->info_block->s.used = (__u64)virtqueue_get_used(vq);
> +		info->info_block->s.avail = (__u64)virtqueue_get_avail_addr(vq);
> +		info->info_block->s.used = (__u64)virtqueue_get_used_addr(vq);
>  		ccw->count = sizeof(info->info_block->s);
>  	}
>  	ccw->cmd_code = CCW_CMD_SET_VQ;
> @@ -769,10 +770,8 @@ static u64 virtio_ccw_get_features(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>  static void ccw_transport_features(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>  {
>  	/*
> -	 * Packed ring isn't enabled on virtio_ccw for now,
> -	 * because virtio_ccw uses some legacy accessors,
> -	 * e.g. virtqueue_get_avail() and virtqueue_get_used()
> -	 * which aren't available in packed ring currently.
> +	 * There shouldn't be anything that precludes supporting paced.

s/paced/packed/

> +	 * TODO: Remove the limitation after having another look into this.
>  	 */
>  	__virtio_clear_bit(vdev, VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED);
>  }
> @@ -1255,6 +1254,18 @@ static int virtio_ccw_online(struct ccw_device *cdev)
>  		ret = -ENOMEM;
>  		goto out_free;
>  	}
> +	vcdev->vdev.dev.parent = &cdev->dev;

That one makes sense, pci and mmio are doing that as well.

> +	cdev->dev.dma_mask = &vcdev->dma_mask;

That one feels a bit weird. Will this change in one of the follow-on
patches? (Have not yet looked at the whole series.)

> +
> +	ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
> +	if (ret)
> +		ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev,
> +						DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_warn(&cdev->dev, "Failed to enable 64-bit or 32-bit DMA.  Trying to continue, but this might not work.\n");

This does not look like you'd try to continue?

> +		goto out_free;
> +	}
> +
>  	vcdev->config_block = kzalloc(sizeof(*vcdev->config_block),
>  				   GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!vcdev->config_block) {

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-09  9:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-04 23:16 [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] virtio/s390: use vring_create_virtqueue Halil Pasic
2019-04-08 11:01   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-08 11:01     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-08 12:37     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-04-08 12:37       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-04-08 13:20     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw Halil Pasic
2019-04-09  9:57   ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-04-09  9:57     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 11:29     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 13:01       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 13:01         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 13:23         ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 15:47           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 15:47             ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 10:16   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 10:16     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 10:54     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 17:18       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 17:18         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 12:22   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-04-09 12:22     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-04-09 12:39     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] s390/cio: introduce cio DMA pool Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 10:44   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 10:44     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 12:11     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 17:14       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 17:14         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 15:31         ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-10 16:07           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 16:07             ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 16:52             ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-11 18:25   ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-11 18:25     ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-12 11:20     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-12 12:12       ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-12 12:12         ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-12 15:30         ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-16 12:50           ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-16 12:50             ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-16 13:31             ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] s390/cio: add protected virtualization support to cio Halil Pasic
2019-04-09 17:55   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-09 17:55     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10  0:10     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-10  8:25       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10  8:25         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 13:02         ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-10 16:16           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 16:16             ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11 14:15   ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-11 14:15     ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-12 11:29     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] s390/airq: use DMA memory for adapter interrupts Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O Halil Pasic
2019-04-10  8:42   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10  8:42     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 14:42     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-10 16:21       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 16:21         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] virtio/s390: add indirection to indicators access Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for notifiers Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] virtio/s390: consolidate DMA allocations Halil Pasic
2019-04-10  8:46   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10  8:46     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 15:12     ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-10 16:36       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 16:36         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 17:48         ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-11  9:24           ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11  9:24             ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11 10:10             ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] virtio/s390: use the cio DMA pool Halil Pasic
2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] virtio/s390: make airq summary indicators DMA Halil Pasic
2019-04-10  9:20 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10  9:20   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 15:57   ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-10 16:24     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 16:24       ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-12 13:47 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-04-12 13:47   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-04-16 11:10   ` Halil Pasic
2019-04-16 11:50     ` David Hildenbrand
2019-04-16 11:50       ` David Hildenbrand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190409115743.26e51b81.cohuck@redhat.com \
    --to=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mihajlov@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=sebott@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.