From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55211 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OOTwM-00008k-IY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:04:23 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OOTwL-00053K-21
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:04:22 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33024)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OOTwK-00053A-QF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:04:21 -0400
Message-ID: <4C175E30.2030605@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:04:16 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <y2u8286e4ee1004190941jfa473787z795d8a4dd1b295d5@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikru9Ge2f2vr4dgi9Icn6D9THYiJmEb5-xpBIro@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikru9Ge2f2vr4dgi9Icn6D9THYiJmEb5-xpBIro@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Unusual physical address when using 64-bit BAR
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Cam Macdonell <cam@cs.ualberta.ca>
Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>

On 06/11/2010 08:31 PM, Cam Macdonell wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Cam Macdonell<cam@cs.ualberta.ca>  wrote:
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to use a 64-bit BAR for my shared memory device.  In simply
>> changing the memory type in pci_register_bar() to
>> PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 I get an unusual physical address for
>> that BAR (and my driver crashes in pci_ioremap).
>>
>> from lspci:
>>
>> 00:04.0 RAM memory: Qumranet, Inc. Device 1110
>>         Subsystem: Qumranet, Inc. Device 1100
>>         Flags: fast devsel, IRQ 10
>>         Memory at f1020000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1K]
>>         Memory at f1021000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
>>         Memory at c20000000000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1024M]
>>         Capabilities:<access denied>
>> 00: f4 1a 10 11 03 00 10 00 00 00 00 05 00 00 00 00
>> 10: 00 00 02 f1 00 10 02 f1 04 00 00 00 00 c2 00 00
>> 20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f4 1a 00 11
>> 30: 00 00 00 00 40 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 01 00 00
>>
>> with DEBUG_MEMREG, I see
>>
>> kvm_unregister_memory_area:666 Unregistering memory region
>> c20000000000 (40000000)
>> kvm_destroy_phys_mem:649 slot 7 start c20000000000 len 0 flags 0
>> IVSHMEM: addr = 3221225472 size = 1073741824
>> kvm_register_phys_mem:605 memory: gpa: c200c0000000, size: 40000000,
>> uaddr: 7f6dd7ffe000, slot: 7, flags: 0
>> kvm_unregister_memory_area:666 Unregistering memory region
>> c200c0000000 (40000000)
>> kvm_destroy_phys_mem:649 slot 7 start c200c0000000 len 0 flags 0
>> IVSHMEM: addr = 0 size = 1073741824
>> kvm_register_phys_mem:605 memory: gpa: c20000000000, size: 40000000,
>> uaddr: 7f6dd7ffe000, slot: 7, flags: 0
>> kvm_unregister_memory_area:666 Unregistering memory region
>> c20000000000 (40000000)
>> kvm_destroy_phys_mem:649 slot 7 start c20000000000 len 0 flags 0
>> IVSHMEM: addr = 0 size = 1073741824
>> kvm_register_phys_mem:605 memory: gpa: ffffffff00000000, size:
>> 40000000, uaddr: 7f6dd7ffe000, slot: 7, flags: 0
>> kvm_unregister_memory_area:666 Unregistering memory region
>> ffffffff00000000 (40000000)
>> kvm_destroy_phys_mem:649 slot 7 start ffffffff00000000 len 0 flags 0
>> IVSHMEM: addr = 0 size = 1073741824
>> kvm_register_phys_mem:605 memory: gpa: c20000000000, size: 40000000,
>> uaddr: 7f6dd7ffe000, slot: 7, flags: 0
>>
>> (the IVSHMEM lines are my debug statements)
>>
>> address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual  (guest)
>> address sizes   : 38 bits physical, 48 bits virtual  (host)
>>
>>      
> Hi, I happened to run into this problem again when trying to use a
> 64-bit BAR.  I did a bit more digging and the test that is failing is
> called from arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c in the guest and here it is.
>
> static inline int phys_addr_valid(resource_size_t addr)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT
>   	return !(addr>>  boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits);
> #else
> 	return 1;
> #endif
> }
>
> the value of addr (in this case the 48-bit virtual address
> c20000000000) is shifted to the right shift by
> boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits (which is 40 bits, the physical address
> size), so a non-zero value is returned which causes the test to fail
> and generates the "invalid physical address" error in the guest.
>
> Any help is appreciated as to whether this is a Qemu or guest kernel issue.
>    

The guest kernel should never have generated an address that is bigger 
than cpu_phys_bits in the first place.  What's the value for 
cpu_phys_bits in the guest? (/proc/cpuinfo, 'address sizes :' line).

Is this really the address the guest programmed, or is qemu 
misinterpreting it?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function