From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C9DC433DB for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 16:16:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D85CD64E85 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 16:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233302AbhBRQQE (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:16:04 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:52688 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232480AbhBRPxV (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:53:21 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08308ED1; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from slackpad.fritz.box (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C287C3F73D; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:51:26 +0000 From: Andre Przywara To: Alexandru Elisei Cc: Will Deacon , Julien Thierry , kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH kvmtool 15/21] vfio: Refactor ioport trap handler Message-ID: <20210218155126.3d61257d@slackpad.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: References: <20201210142908.169597-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20201210142908.169597-16-andre.przywara@arm.com> Organization: Arm Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-slackware-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:47:31 +0000 Alexandru Elisei wrote: > Hi Andre, > > Looks good, one nitpick below. > > On 12/10/20 2:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: > > With the planned retirement of the special ioport emulation code, we > > need to provide an emulation function compatible with the MMIO prototype. > > > > Adjust the I/O port trap handler to use that new function, and provide > > shims to implement the old ioport interface, for now. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara > > --- > > vfio/core.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/vfio/core.c b/vfio/core.c > > index 0b45e78b..f55f1f87 100644 > > --- a/vfio/core.c > > +++ b/vfio/core.c > > @@ -81,15 +81,12 @@ out_free_buf: > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > - u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +static bool _vfio_ioport_in(struct vfio_region *region, u32 offset, > > + void *data, int len) > > { > > - u32 val; > > - ssize_t nr; > > - struct vfio_region *region = ioport->priv; > > struct vfio_device *vdev = region->vdev; > > - > > - u32 offset = port - region->port_base; > > + ssize_t nr; > > + u32 val; > > > > if (!(region->info.flags & VFIO_REGION_INFO_FLAG_READ)) > > return false; > > @@ -97,7 +94,7 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > nr = pread(vdev->fd, &val, len, region->info.offset + offset); > > if (nr != len) { > > vfio_dev_err(vdev, "could not read %d bytes from I/O port 0x%x\n", > > - len, port); > > + len, offset); > > To keep things functionally identical, shouldn't that be offset + > region->port_base? I think it's easier to identify the device when we have the PCI > ioport address. Yeah, true. Although I think "vfio_dev_err(vdev, ..." already indicates the device at fault, but indeed the actual ioport address is more canonical to use. Thanks, Andre > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > return false; > > } > > > > @@ -118,15 +115,13 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > return true; > > } > > > > -static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > - u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +static bool _vfio_ioport_out(struct vfio_region *region, u32 offset, > > + void *data, int len) > > { > > - u32 val; > > - ssize_t nr; > > - struct vfio_region *region = ioport->priv; > > struct vfio_device *vdev = region->vdev; > > + ssize_t nr; > > + u32 val; > > > > - u32 offset = port - region->port_base; > > > > if (!(region->info.flags & VFIO_REGION_INFO_FLAG_WRITE)) > > return false; > > @@ -148,11 +143,37 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > nr = pwrite(vdev->fd, &val, len, region->info.offset + offset); > > if (nr != len) > > vfio_dev_err(vdev, "could not write %d bytes to I/O port 0x%x", > > - len, port); > > + len, offset); > > > > return nr == len; > > } > > > > +static void vfio_ioport_mmio(struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, u64 addr, u8 *data, u32 len, > > + u8 is_write, void *ptr) > > +{ > > + struct vfio_region *region = ptr; > > + u32 offset = addr - region->port_base; > > + > > + if (is_write) > > + _vfio_ioport_out(region, offset, data, len); > > + else > > + _vfio_ioport_in(region, offset, data, len); > > +} > > + > > +static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > + u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +{ > > + vfio_ioport_mmio(vcpu, port, data, len, true, ioport->priv); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > +static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > + u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +{ > > + vfio_ioport_mmio(vcpu, port, data, len, false, ioport->priv); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > static struct ioport_operations vfio_ioport_ops = { > > .io_in = vfio_ioport_in, > > .io_out = vfio_ioport_out, From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E815C433DB for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:52:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 986FD64E85 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:52:44 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 986FD64E85 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D57F54B3DB; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:52:43 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FKkdnE4bf-0X; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:52:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F2A94B3D3; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:52:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098D54B3CE for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:52:42 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FbegYK92LkWi for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:52:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E704B3CD for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:52:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08308ED1; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from slackpad.fritz.box (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C287C3F73D; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:51:26 +0000 From: Andre Przywara To: Alexandru Elisei Subject: Re: [PATCH kvmtool 15/21] vfio: Refactor ioport trap handler Message-ID: <20210218155126.3d61257d@slackpad.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: References: <20201210142908.169597-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20201210142908.169597-16-andre.przywara@arm.com> Organization: Arm Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-slackware-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:47:31 +0000 Alexandru Elisei wrote: > Hi Andre, > > Looks good, one nitpick below. > > On 12/10/20 2:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: > > With the planned retirement of the special ioport emulation code, we > > need to provide an emulation function compatible with the MMIO prototype. > > > > Adjust the I/O port trap handler to use that new function, and provide > > shims to implement the old ioport interface, for now. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara > > --- > > vfio/core.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/vfio/core.c b/vfio/core.c > > index 0b45e78b..f55f1f87 100644 > > --- a/vfio/core.c > > +++ b/vfio/core.c > > @@ -81,15 +81,12 @@ out_free_buf: > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > - u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +static bool _vfio_ioport_in(struct vfio_region *region, u32 offset, > > + void *data, int len) > > { > > - u32 val; > > - ssize_t nr; > > - struct vfio_region *region = ioport->priv; > > struct vfio_device *vdev = region->vdev; > > - > > - u32 offset = port - region->port_base; > > + ssize_t nr; > > + u32 val; > > > > if (!(region->info.flags & VFIO_REGION_INFO_FLAG_READ)) > > return false; > > @@ -97,7 +94,7 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > nr = pread(vdev->fd, &val, len, region->info.offset + offset); > > if (nr != len) { > > vfio_dev_err(vdev, "could not read %d bytes from I/O port 0x%x\n", > > - len, port); > > + len, offset); > > To keep things functionally identical, shouldn't that be offset + > region->port_base? I think it's easier to identify the device when we have the PCI > ioport address. Yeah, true. Although I think "vfio_dev_err(vdev, ..." already indicates the device at fault, but indeed the actual ioport address is more canonical to use. Thanks, Andre > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > return false; > > } > > > > @@ -118,15 +115,13 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > return true; > > } > > > > -static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > - u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +static bool _vfio_ioport_out(struct vfio_region *region, u32 offset, > > + void *data, int len) > > { > > - u32 val; > > - ssize_t nr; > > - struct vfio_region *region = ioport->priv; > > struct vfio_device *vdev = region->vdev; > > + ssize_t nr; > > + u32 val; > > > > - u32 offset = port - region->port_base; > > > > if (!(region->info.flags & VFIO_REGION_INFO_FLAG_WRITE)) > > return false; > > @@ -148,11 +143,37 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > nr = pwrite(vdev->fd, &val, len, region->info.offset + offset); > > if (nr != len) > > vfio_dev_err(vdev, "could not write %d bytes to I/O port 0x%x", > > - len, port); > > + len, offset); > > > > return nr == len; > > } > > > > +static void vfio_ioport_mmio(struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, u64 addr, u8 *data, u32 len, > > + u8 is_write, void *ptr) > > +{ > > + struct vfio_region *region = ptr; > > + u32 offset = addr - region->port_base; > > + > > + if (is_write) > > + _vfio_ioport_out(region, offset, data, len); > > + else > > + _vfio_ioport_in(region, offset, data, len); > > +} > > + > > +static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > + u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +{ > > + vfio_ioport_mmio(vcpu, port, data, len, true, ioport->priv); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > +static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > + u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +{ > > + vfio_ioport_mmio(vcpu, port, data, len, false, ioport->priv); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > static struct ioport_operations vfio_ioport_ops = { > > .io_in = vfio_ioport_in, > > .io_out = vfio_ioport_out, _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEEEDC433DB for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6461E6024A for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6461E6024A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=ZsBkIBCdAwXrVKfZdauo2Yw4GG3m4sy1JruumrZjG58=; b=PQ+xjMJfPgK6rm6zC8mo89+9P wN9qyyrgVRkE6P5amDUEvpZHIDCoClR5SrKD8FDxV63OvubgSU7vb3UNpAmEIA1ApO+9bxeDUSGdU 2cecULsK+bJx0lmAmR9beiurEzhrlePkxL3xMSVd2JdCNCSuHxf3rfkLG45WUrNElZ2zIKInBaSyb ytCcz7o4o5OMrD4E0MsMzJGxCpQvsBOc6d82r8HxdgTgF4c+FkczabgYm5dRXoO1lGPdTEkW5Hk0I G+OVV/ofZZWASR5onAsph+4vqUY8+/UvD+DcUVdMLkpZ8rWLMazegry8ckuRkqQ5/+SQTZO/zvz8F v0Sj94bGg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lClbb-0006fO-TN; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:52:39 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lClbZ-0006eu-HH for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:52:38 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08308ED1; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from slackpad.fritz.box (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C287C3F73D; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:51:26 +0000 From: Andre Przywara To: Alexandru Elisei Subject: Re: [PATCH kvmtool 15/21] vfio: Refactor ioport trap handler Message-ID: <20210218155126.3d61257d@slackpad.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: References: <20201210142908.169597-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20201210142908.169597-16-andre.przywara@arm.com> Organization: Arm Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-slackware-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210218_105237_754286_7F4B7D4C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 24.43 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , Julien Thierry , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:47:31 +0000 Alexandru Elisei wrote: > Hi Andre, > > Looks good, one nitpick below. > > On 12/10/20 2:29 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: > > With the planned retirement of the special ioport emulation code, we > > need to provide an emulation function compatible with the MMIO prototype. > > > > Adjust the I/O port trap handler to use that new function, and provide > > shims to implement the old ioport interface, for now. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara > > --- > > vfio/core.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/vfio/core.c b/vfio/core.c > > index 0b45e78b..f55f1f87 100644 > > --- a/vfio/core.c > > +++ b/vfio/core.c > > @@ -81,15 +81,12 @@ out_free_buf: > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > - u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +static bool _vfio_ioport_in(struct vfio_region *region, u32 offset, > > + void *data, int len) > > { > > - u32 val; > > - ssize_t nr; > > - struct vfio_region *region = ioport->priv; > > struct vfio_device *vdev = region->vdev; > > - > > - u32 offset = port - region->port_base; > > + ssize_t nr; > > + u32 val; > > > > if (!(region->info.flags & VFIO_REGION_INFO_FLAG_READ)) > > return false; > > @@ -97,7 +94,7 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > nr = pread(vdev->fd, &val, len, region->info.offset + offset); > > if (nr != len) { > > vfio_dev_err(vdev, "could not read %d bytes from I/O port 0x%x\n", > > - len, port); > > + len, offset); > > To keep things functionally identical, shouldn't that be offset + > region->port_base? I think it's easier to identify the device when we have the PCI > ioport address. Yeah, true. Although I think "vfio_dev_err(vdev, ..." already indicates the device at fault, but indeed the actual ioport address is more canonical to use. Thanks, Andre > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > return false; > > } > > > > @@ -118,15 +115,13 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > return true; > > } > > > > -static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > - u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +static bool _vfio_ioport_out(struct vfio_region *region, u32 offset, > > + void *data, int len) > > { > > - u32 val; > > - ssize_t nr; > > - struct vfio_region *region = ioport->priv; > > struct vfio_device *vdev = region->vdev; > > + ssize_t nr; > > + u32 val; > > > > - u32 offset = port - region->port_base; > > > > if (!(region->info.flags & VFIO_REGION_INFO_FLAG_WRITE)) > > return false; > > @@ -148,11 +143,37 @@ static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > nr = pwrite(vdev->fd, &val, len, region->info.offset + offset); > > if (nr != len) > > vfio_dev_err(vdev, "could not write %d bytes to I/O port 0x%x", > > - len, port); > > + len, offset); > > > > return nr == len; > > } > > > > +static void vfio_ioport_mmio(struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, u64 addr, u8 *data, u32 len, > > + u8 is_write, void *ptr) > > +{ > > + struct vfio_region *region = ptr; > > + u32 offset = addr - region->port_base; > > + > > + if (is_write) > > + _vfio_ioport_out(region, offset, data, len); > > + else > > + _vfio_ioport_in(region, offset, data, len); > > +} > > + > > +static bool vfio_ioport_out(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > + u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +{ > > + vfio_ioport_mmio(vcpu, port, data, len, true, ioport->priv); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > +static bool vfio_ioport_in(struct ioport *ioport, struct kvm_cpu *vcpu, > > + u16 port, void *data, int len) > > +{ > > + vfio_ioport_mmio(vcpu, port, data, len, false, ioport->priv); > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > static struct ioport_operations vfio_ioport_ops = { > > .io_in = vfio_ioport_in, > > .io_out = vfio_ioport_out, _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel