All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
@ 2014-02-12 23:26 Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  2014-02-13  8:38 ` Jan Beulich
  2014-02-18  4:25 ` Liu, Jinsong
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan @ 2014-02-12 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: chegger, jinsong.liu, suravee.suthikulpanit, boris.ostrovsky,
	xen-devel, JBeulich
  Cc: Aravind Gopalakrishnan

vmce_amd_[rd|wr]msr functions can handle accesses to AMD thresholding
registers. But due to this statement here:
switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
we are wrongly masking off top two bits which meant the register
accesses never made it to vmce_amd_* functions.

Corrected this problem by modifying the mask in this patch to allow
AMD thresholding registers to fall to 'default' case which in turn
allows vmce_amd_* functions to handle access to the registers.

While at it, remove some clutter in the vmce_amd* functions. Retained
current policy of returning zero for reads and ignoring writes.

Signed-off-by: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c |   41 ++++++-------------------------------
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c    |   14 +++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
index 61319dc..03797ab 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
@@ -105,43 +105,14 @@ enum mcheck_type amd_f10_mcheck_init(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 /* amd specific MCA MSR */
 int vmce_amd_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t val)
 {
-	switch (msr) {
-	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
-		v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc = val; 
-		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
-		break;
-	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
-	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
-		/* ignore write: we do not emulate link and l3 cache errors
-		 * to the guest.
-		 */
-		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
-		break;
-	default:
-		return 0;
-	}
-
-	return 1;
+    /* Do nothing as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
+    mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
+    return 1;
 }
 
 int vmce_amd_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
 {
-	switch (msr) {
-	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
-		*val = v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc;
-		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
-		break;
-	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
-	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
-		/* we do not emulate link and l3 cache
-		 * errors to the guest.
-		 */
-		*val = 0;
-		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
-		break;
-	default:
-		return 0;
-	}
-
-	return 1;
+    /* Assign '0' as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
+    *val = 0;
+    return 1;
 }
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
index f6c35db..84843fc 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
@@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
 
     *val = 0;
 
-    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
+    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
+    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
     {
     case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
         /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
@@ -148,6 +149,10 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
             ret = vmce_intel_rdmsr(v, msr, val);
             break;
         case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
+            /*
+             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall into default. 
+             * Handle reads here.
+             */
             ret = vmce_amd_rdmsr(v, msr, val);
             break;
         default:
@@ -210,7 +215,8 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t val)
     int ret = 1;
     unsigned int bank = (msr - MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL) / 4;
 
-    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
+    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
+    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
     {
     case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
         /*
@@ -246,6 +252,10 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t val)
             ret = vmce_intel_wrmsr(v, msr, val);
             break;
         case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
+            /*
+             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall into default. 
+             * Handle writes here.
+             */
             ret = vmce_amd_wrmsr(v, msr, val);
             break;
         default:
-- 
1.7.9.5

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-12 23:26 [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD thresolding MSRs Aravind Gopalakrishnan
@ 2014-02-13  8:38 ` Jan Beulich
  2014-02-13 17:27   ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  2014-02-18  4:25 ` Liu, Jinsong
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-02-13  8:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  Cc: jinsong.liu, boris.ostrovsky, chegger, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

>>> On 13.02.14 at 00:26, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
>  
>      *val = 0;
>  
> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>      {
>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>          /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */

I'm confused: You now add a comment as if the mask was including
bit 4, which it doesn't. What am I missing?

Also, please get used to mention (commonly at the bottom of the
commit message, after a --- separator) what changed compared to
the previous iteration.

Jan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-13  8:38 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-02-13 17:27   ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  2014-02-13 18:24     ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan @ 2014-02-13 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Beulich
  Cc: jinsong.liu, boris.ostrovsky, chegger, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

On 2/13/2014 2:38 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>     *val = 0;
>>   
>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>       {
>>       case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>           /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
> I'm confused: You now add a comment as if the mask was including
> bit 4, which it doesn't. What am I missing?

Darn. Sorry about that. Will fix..
> Also, please get used to mention (commonly at the bottom of the
> commit message, after a --- separator) what changed compared to
> the previous iteration.
>
>
Okay, will do.

-Aravind.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-13 17:27   ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
@ 2014-02-13 18:24     ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  2014-02-14  8:28       ` Jan Beulich
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan @ 2014-02-13 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Beulich
  Cc: jinsong.liu, boris.ostrovsky, chegger, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

On 2/13/2014 11:27 AM, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> On 2/13/2014 2:38 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>     *val = 0;
>>>   -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>       {
>>>       case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>>           /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
>> I'm confused: You now add a comment as if the mask was including
>> bit 4, which it doesn't. What am I missing?
>
> Darn. Sorry about that. Will fix..

Jan,

Do let me know if the following wording is fine:

/*
  * Apply mask to allow bits[0:1] (necessary to uniquely identify MC0)
  * MC1 is handled by virtue of 'bank' value.
  */

If not, I'm open to suggestions:)

Thanks,
-Aravind.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-13 18:24     ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
@ 2014-02-14  8:28       ` Jan Beulich
  2014-02-16 14:47         ` Liu, Jinsong
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-02-14  8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  Cc: jinsong.liu, boris.ostrovsky, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

>>> On 13.02.14 at 19:24, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
wrote:
> On 2/13/2014 11:27 AM, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
>> On 2/13/2014 2:38 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>     *val = 0;
>>>>   -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>       {
>>>>       case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>>>           /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
>>> I'm confused: You now add a comment as if the mask was including
>>> bit 4, which it doesn't. What am I missing?
>>
>> Darn. Sorry about that. Will fix..
> 
> Jan,
> 
> Do let me know if the following wording is fine:
> 
> /*
>   * Apply mask to allow bits[0:1] (necessary to uniquely identify MC0)
>   * MC1 is handled by virtue of 'bank' value.
>   */
> 
> If not, I'm open to suggestions:)

I don't particularly like this, but I also don't have a good alternative
suggestion. It was Christoph who asked for a comment in the first
place. Since I don't see a particular need for a comment here, you
two should work out what best suits both of you.

Jan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-14  8:28       ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-02-16 14:47         ` Liu, Jinsong
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Liu, Jinsong @ 2014-02-16 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Beulich, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

Sorry, Jan and Aravind, I just return from long Chinese Spring Festival vacation. I will review the thread ASAP.

Thanks,
Jinsong


Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 13.02.14 at 19:24, Aravind Gopalakrishnan
>>>> <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com> 
> wrote:
>> On 2/13/2014 11:27 AM, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
>>> On 2/13/2014 2:38 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>     *val = 0;
>>>>>   -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>>>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>>       {
>>>>>       case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>>>>           /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
>>>> I'm confused: You now add a comment as if the mask was including
>>>> bit 4, which it doesn't. What am I missing?
>>> 
>>> Darn. Sorry about that. Will fix..
>> 
>> Jan,
>> 
>> Do let me know if the following wording is fine:
>> 
>> /*
>>   * Apply mask to allow bits[0:1] (necessary to uniquely identify
>> MC0) 
>>   * MC1 is handled by virtue of 'bank' value.
>>   */
>> 
>> If not, I'm open to suggestions:)
> 
> I don't particularly like this, but I also don't have a good
> alternative suggestion. It was Christoph who asked for a comment in
> the first place. Since I don't see a particular need for a comment
> here, you 
> two should work out what best suits both of you.
> 
> Jan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-12 23:26 [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD thresolding MSRs Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  2014-02-13  8:38 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-02-18  4:25 ` Liu, Jinsong
  2014-02-18  9:41   ` Jan Beulich
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Liu, Jinsong @ 2014-02-18  4:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aravind Gopalakrishnan, chegger, suravee.suthikulpanit,
	boris.ostrovsky, xen-devel, JBeulich

For Intel it didn't disturb Intel's vmce logic so it's OK for me.

For AMD, c000_040x is bank4 (MC4_MISCj), while vmce current only support bank0/1. Even considering in the future AMD may add MC0/1_MISCj, it doesn't need emulation (say, read return 0 and write ignore). So how about simply filter out AMD MCx_MISCj at mce_vendor_bank_msr()?

Thanks,
Jinsong

Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> vmce_amd_[rd|wr]msr functions can handle accesses to AMD thresholding
> registers. But due to this statement here:
> switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
> we are wrongly masking off top two bits which meant the register
> accesses never made it to vmce_amd_* functions.
> 
> Corrected this problem by modifying the mask in this patch to allow
> AMD thresholding registers to fall to 'default' case which in turn
> allows vmce_amd_* functions to handle access to the registers.
> 
> While at it, remove some clutter in the vmce_amd* functions. Retained
> current policy of returning zero for reads and ignoring writes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c |   41
>  ++++++------------------------------- xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>  |   14 +++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 37
> deletions(-) 
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c 
> index 61319dc..03797ab 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
> @@ -105,43 +105,14 @@ enum mcheck_type amd_f10_mcheck_init(struct
>  cpuinfo_x86 *c) /* amd specific MCA MSR */
>  int vmce_amd_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t val)
>  {
> -	switch (msr) {
> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
> -		v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc = val;
> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
> -		break;
> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
> -		/* ignore write: we do not emulate link and l3 cache errors
> -		 * to the guest.
> -		 */
> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
> -		break;
> -	default:
> -		return 0;
> -	}
> -
> -	return 1;
> +    /* Do nothing as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
> +    mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
> +    return 1;
>  }
> 
>  int vmce_amd_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
>  {
> -	switch (msr) {
> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
> -		*val = v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc;
> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
> -		break;
> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
> -		/* we do not emulate link and l3 cache
> -		 * errors to the guest.
> -		 */
> -		*val = 0;
> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
> -		break;
> -	default:
> -		return 0;
> -	}
> -
> -	return 1;
> +    /* Assign '0' as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
> +    *val = 0;
> +    return 1;
>  }
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c 
> index f6c35db..84843fc 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
> uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) 
> 
>      *val = 0;
> 
> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>      {
>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>          /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
> @@ -148,6 +149,10 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
>              uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) ret = vmce_intel_rdmsr(v,
>              msr, val); break;
>          case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
> +            /*
> +             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall
> into default. +             * Handle reads here.
> +             */
>              ret = vmce_amd_rdmsr(v, msr, val);
>              break;
>          default:
> @@ -210,7 +215,8 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v,
>      uint32_t msr, uint64_t val) int ret = 1;
>      unsigned int bank = (msr - MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL) / 4;
> 
> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>      {
>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>          /*
> @@ -246,6 +252,10 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v,
>              uint32_t msr, uint64_t val) ret = vmce_intel_wrmsr(v,
>              msr, val); break;
>          case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
> +            /*
> +             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall
> into default. +             * Handle writes here.
> +             */
>              ret = vmce_amd_wrmsr(v, msr, val);
>              break;
>          default:

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18  4:25 ` Liu, Jinsong
@ 2014-02-18  9:41   ` Jan Beulich
  2014-02-18 10:52     ` Liu, Jinsong
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-02-18  9:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jinsong Liu
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan,
	suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

>>> On 18.02.14 at 05:25, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
> For Intel it didn't disturb Intel's vmce logic so it's OK for me.
> 
> For AMD, c000_040x is bank4 (MC4_MISCj), while vmce current only support 
> bank0/1. Even considering in the future AMD may add MC0/1_MISCj, it doesn't 
> need emulation (say, read return 0 and write ignore). So how about simply 
> filter out AMD MCx_MISCj at mce_vendor_bank_msr()?

mce_vendor_bank_msr() already has

    case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
        switch (msr) {
        case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1:
        case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2:
        case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3:
            return 1;
        }

Jan

> Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
>> vmce_amd_[rd|wr]msr functions can handle accesses to AMD thresholding
>> registers. But due to this statement here:
>> switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>> we are wrongly masking off top two bits which meant the register
>> accesses never made it to vmce_amd_* functions.
>> 
>> Corrected this problem by modifying the mask in this patch to allow
>> AMD thresholding registers to fall to 'default' case which in turn
>> allows vmce_amd_* functions to handle access to the registers.
>> 
>> While at it, remove some clutter in the vmce_amd* functions. Retained
>> current policy of returning zero for reads and ignoring writes.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
>> ---
>>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c |   41
>>  ++++++------------------------------- xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>  |   14 +++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 37
>> deletions(-) 
>> 
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c 
>> index 61319dc..03797ab 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>> @@ -105,43 +105,14 @@ enum mcheck_type amd_f10_mcheck_init(struct
>>  cpuinfo_x86 *c) /* amd specific MCA MSR */
>>  int vmce_amd_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t val)
>>  {
>> -	switch (msr) {
>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
>> -		v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc = val;
>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
>> -		break;
>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
>> -		/* ignore write: we do not emulate link and l3 cache errors
>> -		 * to the guest.
>> -		 */
>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
>> -		break;
>> -	default:
>> -		return 0;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	return 1;
>> +    /* Do nothing as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
>> +    mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
>> +    return 1;
>>  }
>> 
>>  int vmce_amd_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
>>  {
>> -	switch (msr) {
>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
>> -		*val = v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc;
>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
>> -		break;
>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
>> -		/* we do not emulate link and l3 cache
>> -		 * errors to the guest.
>> -		 */
>> -		*val = 0;
>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
>> -		break;
>> -	default:
>> -		return 0;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	return 1;
>> +    /* Assign '0' as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
>> +    *val = 0;
>> +    return 1;
>>  }
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c 
>> index f6c35db..84843fc 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
>> uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) 
>> 
>>      *val = 0;
>> 
>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>      {
>>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>          /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
>> @@ -148,6 +149,10 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
>>              uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) ret = vmce_intel_rdmsr(v,
>>              msr, val); break;
>>          case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
>> +            /*
>> +             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall
>> into default. +             * Handle reads here.
>> +             */
>>              ret = vmce_amd_rdmsr(v, msr, val);
>>              break;
>>          default:
>> @@ -210,7 +215,8 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v,
>>      uint32_t msr, uint64_t val) int ret = 1;
>>      unsigned int bank = (msr - MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL) / 4;
>> 
>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>      {
>>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>          /*
>> @@ -246,6 +252,10 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v,
>>              uint32_t msr, uint64_t val) ret = vmce_intel_wrmsr(v,
>>              msr, val); break;
>>          case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
>> +            /*
>> +             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall
>> into default. +             * Handle writes here.
>> +             */
>>              ret = vmce_amd_wrmsr(v, msr, val);
>>              break;
>>          default:

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18  9:41   ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-02-18 10:52     ` Liu, Jinsong
  2014-02-18 11:02       ` Jan Beulich
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Liu, Jinsong @ 2014-02-18 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Beulich
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan,
	suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 18.02.14 at 05:25, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>> For Intel it didn't disturb Intel's vmce logic so it's OK for me.
>> 
>> For AMD, c000_040x is bank4 (MC4_MISCj), while vmce current only
>> support bank0/1. Even considering in the future AMD may add
>> MC0/1_MISCj, it doesn't need emulation (say, read return 0 and write
>> ignore). So how about simply filter out AMD MCx_MISCj at
>> mce_vendor_bank_msr()? 
> 
> mce_vendor_bank_msr() already has
> 
>     case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
>         switch (msr) {
>         case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1:
>         case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2:
>         case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3:
>             return 1;
>         }
> 
> Jan

OK.

> 
>> Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
>>> vmce_amd_[rd|wr]msr functions can handle accesses to AMD
>>> thresholding registers. But due to this statement here:
>>> switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>> we are wrongly masking off top two bits which meant the register
>>> accesses never made it to vmce_amd_* functions.
>>> 
>>> Corrected this problem by modifying the mask in this patch to allow
>>> AMD thresholding registers to fall to 'default' case which in turn
>>> allows vmce_amd_* functions to handle access to the registers.
>>> 
>>> While at it, remove some clutter in the vmce_amd* functions.
>>> Retained current policy of returning zero for reads and ignoring
>>> writes. 
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Aravind Gopalakrishnan
>>>  <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com> ---
>>>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c |   41
>>>  ++++++-------------------------------
>>> xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c |   14 +++++++++++-- 2 files
>>> changed, 18 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)  
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>>> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>>> index 61319dc..03797ab 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/amd_f10.c
>>> @@ -105,43 +105,14 @@ enum mcheck_type amd_f10_mcheck_init(struct
>>>  cpuinfo_x86 *c) /* amd specific MCA MSR */
>>>  int vmce_amd_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t val)  {
>>> -	switch (msr) {
>>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
>>> -		v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc = val;
>>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
>>> -		break;
>>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
>>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
>>> -		/* ignore write: we do not emulate link and l3 cache errors
>>> -		 * to the guest.
>>> -		 */
>>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val);
>>> -		break;
>>> -	default:
>>> -		return 0;
>>> -	}
>>> -
>>> -	return 1;
>>> +    /* Do nothing as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */
>>> +    mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: wr msr %#"PRIx64"\n", val); +   
>>>  return 1; }
>>> 
>>>  int vmce_amd_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t
>>> *val)  { 
>>> -	switch (msr) {
>>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC1: /* DRAM error type */
>>> -		*val = v->arch.vmce.bank[1].mci_misc;
>>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
>>> -		break;
>>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC2: /* Link error type */
>>> -	case MSR_F10_MC4_MISC3: /* L3 cache error type */
>>> -		/* we do not emulate link and l3 cache
>>> -		 * errors to the guest.
>>> -		 */
>>> -		*val = 0;
>>> -		mce_printk(MCE_VERBOSE, "MCE: rd msr %#"PRIx64"\n", *val);
>>> -		break;
>>> -	default:
>>> -		return 0;
>>> -	}
>>> -
>>> -	return 1;
>>> +    /* Assign '0' as we don't emulate this MC bank currently */ + 
>>> *val = 0; +    return 1;
>>>  }
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>> index f6c35db..84843fc 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
>>> uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) 
>>> 
>>>      *val = 0;
>>> 
>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */

I don't think this comments is good here. Remove it is better.

Thanks,
Jinsong


>>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>      {
>>>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>>          /* stick all 1's to MCi_CTL */
>>> @@ -148,6 +149,10 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
>>>              uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) ret = vmce_intel_rdmsr(v,
>>>              msr, val); break;
>>>          case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
>>> +            /*
>>> +             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall
>>> into default. +             * Handle reads here.
>>> +             */
>>>              ret = vmce_amd_rdmsr(v, msr, val);
>>>              break;
>>>          default:
>>> @@ -210,7 +215,8 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v,
>>>      uint32_t msr, uint64_t val) int ret = 1;
>>>      unsigned int bank = (msr - MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL) / 4;
>>> 
>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>> +    switch ( msr & (-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>      {
>>>      case MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL:
>>>          /*
>>> @@ -246,6 +252,10 @@ static int bank_mce_wrmsr(struct vcpu *v,
>>>              uint32_t msr, uint64_t val) ret = vmce_intel_wrmsr(v,
>>>              msr, val); break;
>>>          case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
>>> +            /*
>>> +             * Extended block of AMD thresholding registers fall
>>> into default. +             * Handle writes here.
>>> +             */
>>>              ret = vmce_amd_wrmsr(v, msr, val);
>>>              break;
>>>          default:

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18 10:52     ` Liu, Jinsong
@ 2014-02-18 11:02       ` Jan Beulich
  2014-02-18 11:42         ` Liu, Jinsong
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-02-18 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jinsong Liu
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan,
	suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

>>> On 18.02.14 at 11:52, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu *v,
>>>> uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) 
>>>> 
>>>>      *val = 0;
>>>> 
>>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
> 
> I don't think this comments is good here. Remove it is better.

I had asked for this to be removed again too. I'm really thinking
that V3 is what we should go with.

Jan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18 11:02       ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-02-18 11:42         ` Liu, Jinsong
  2014-02-18 12:36           ` Jan Beulich
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Liu, Jinsong @ 2014-02-18 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Beulich
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan,
	suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 18.02.14 at 11:52, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu
>>>>> *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) 
>>>>> 
>>>>>      *val = 0;
>>>>> 
>>>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>> 
>> I don't think this comments is good here. Remove it is better.
> 
> I had asked for this to be removed again too. I'm really thinking
> that V3 is what we should go with.
> 
> Jan

V3 is fine, except adding comments for '-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL' is slightly better.

Thanks,
Jinsong

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18 11:42         ` Liu, Jinsong
@ 2014-02-18 12:36           ` Jan Beulich
  2014-02-18 12:42             ` Liu, Jinsong
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2014-02-18 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jinsong Liu
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan,
	suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

>>> On 18.02.14 at 12:42, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 18.02.14 at 11:52, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu
>>>>>> *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val) 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>      *val = 0;
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>> 
>>> I don't think this comments is good here. Remove it is better.
>> 
>> I had asked for this to be removed again too. I'm really thinking
>> that V3 is what we should go with.
> 
> V3 is fine, except adding comments for '-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL' is slightly 
> better.

Can I read this as an ack then (I already explained elsewhere
why I think a comment there is rather pointless)?

Jan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18 12:36           ` Jan Beulich
@ 2014-02-18 12:42             ` Liu, Jinsong
  2014-02-18 16:23               ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Liu, Jinsong @ 2014-02-18 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jan Beulich
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, Aravind Gopalakrishnan,
	suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 18.02.14 at 12:42, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 18.02.14 at 11:52, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com>
>>>>>> wrote: 
>>>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>>>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu
>>>>>>> *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>      *val = 0;
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think this comments is good here. Remove it is better.
>>> 
>>> I had asked for this to be removed again too. I'm really thinking
>>> that V3 is what we should go with.
>> 
>> V3 is fine, except adding comments for '-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL' is
>> slightly better.
> 
> Can I read this as an ack then (I already explained elsewhere
> why I think a comment there is rather pointless)?
> 
> Jan

Yes, please.

Reviewed-by: Liu Jinsong <jinsong.liu@intel.com>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD  thresolding MSRs
  2014-02-18 12:42             ` Liu, Jinsong
@ 2014-02-18 16:23               ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan @ 2014-02-18 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Liu, Jinsong, Jan Beulich
  Cc: boris.ostrovsky, chegger, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel

On 2/18/2014 6:42 AM, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 18.02.14 at 12:42, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>>> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 18.02.14 at 11:52, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/vmce.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ static int bank_mce_rdmsr(const struct vcpu
>>>>>>>> *v, uint32_t msr, uint64_t *val)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       *val = 0;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -    switch ( msr & (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL | 3) )
>>>>>>>> +    /* Allow only first 3 MC banks into switch() */
>>>>> I don't think this comments is good here. Remove it is better.
>>>> I had asked for this to be removed again too. I'm really thinking
>>>> that V3 is what we should go with.
>>> V3 is fine, except adding comments for '-MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL' is
>>> slightly better.
>> Can I read this as an ack then (I already explained elsewhere
>> why I think a comment there is rather pointless)?
>>
>> Jan

Ok, guess V3 is good enough..

> Yes, please.
>
> Reviewed-by: Liu Jinsong <jinsong.liu@intel.com>

Thanks,
-Aravind.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-18 16:23 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-02-12 23:26 [PATCH V4.1] mcheck, vmce: Allow vmce_amd_* functions to handle AMD thresolding MSRs Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2014-02-13  8:38 ` Jan Beulich
2014-02-13 17:27   ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2014-02-13 18:24     ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2014-02-14  8:28       ` Jan Beulich
2014-02-16 14:47         ` Liu, Jinsong
2014-02-18  4:25 ` Liu, Jinsong
2014-02-18  9:41   ` Jan Beulich
2014-02-18 10:52     ` Liu, Jinsong
2014-02-18 11:02       ` Jan Beulich
2014-02-18 11:42         ` Liu, Jinsong
2014-02-18 12:36           ` Jan Beulich
2014-02-18 12:42             ` Liu, Jinsong
2014-02-18 16:23               ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan

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.