Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] vfio/fsl-mc: Scan DPRC objects on vfio-fsl-mc driver bind

[Diana Craciun OSS <diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com>]

Hi Eric,

On 9/3/2020 5:06 PM, Auger Eric wrote:
> Hi Diana,
> 
> On 8/26/20 11:33 AM, Diana Craciun wrote:
>> The DPRC (Data Path Resource Container) device is a bus device and has
>> child devices attached to it. When the vfio-fsl-mc driver is probed
>> the DPRC is scanned and the child devices discovered and initialized.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@nxp.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c         | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h |  1 +
>>   2 files changed, 85 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
>> index 8b53c2a25b32..85e007be3a5d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
>> @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
>>   
>>   #include "vfio_fsl_mc_private.h"
>>   
>> +static struct fsl_mc_driver vfio_fsl_mc_driver;
>> +
>>   static int vfio_fsl_mc_open(void *device_data)
>>   {
>>   	if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE))
>> @@ -84,6 +86,72 @@ static const struct vfio_device_ops vfio_fsl_mc_ops = {
>>   	.mmap		= vfio_fsl_mc_mmap,
>>   };
>>   
>> +static int vfio_fsl_mc_bus_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb,
>> +				    unsigned long action, void *data)
>> +{
>> +	struct vfio_fsl_mc_device *vdev = container_of(nb,
>> +					struct vfio_fsl_mc_device, nb);
>> +	struct device *dev = data;
>> +	struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev = to_fsl_mc_device(dev);
>> +	struct fsl_mc_device *mc_cont = to_fsl_mc_device(mc_dev->dev.parent);
>> +
>> +	if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE &&
>> +	    vdev->mc_dev == mc_cont) {
>> +		mc_dev->driver_override = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s",
>> +						    vfio_fsl_mc_ops.name);
>> +		if (!mc_dev->driver_override)
>> +			dev_warn(dev, "Setting driver override for device in dprc %s failed\n",
>> +			     dev_name(&mc_cont->dev));
>> +		dev_info(dev, "Setting driver override for device in dprc %s\n",
>> +			 dev_name(&mc_cont->dev));
> Don't you miss an else here?
>> +	} else if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_BOUND_DRIVER &&
>> +		vdev->mc_dev == mc_cont) {
>> +		struct fsl_mc_driver *mc_drv = to_fsl_mc_driver(dev->driver);
>> +
>> +		if (mc_drv && mc_drv != &vfio_fsl_mc_driver)
>> +			dev_warn(dev, "Object %s bound to driver %s while DPRC bound to vfio-fsl-mc\n",
>> +				 dev_name(dev), mc_drv->driver.name);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int vfio_fsl_mc_init_device(struct vfio_fsl_mc_device *vdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev = vdev->mc_dev;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	/* Non-dprc devices share mc_io from parent */
>> +	if (!is_fsl_mc_bus_dprc(mc_dev)) {
>> +		struct fsl_mc_device *mc_cont = to_fsl_mc_device(mc_dev->dev.parent);
>> +
>> +		mc_dev->mc_io = mc_cont->mc_io;
>> +		return 0;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	vdev->nb.notifier_call = vfio_fsl_mc_bus_notifier;
>> +	ret = bus_register_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		return ret;
>> +
>> +	/* open DPRC, allocate a MC portal */
>> +	ret = dprc_setup(mc_dev);
>> +	if (ret < 0) {
> if (ret) here and in other places? or are there any > returned values
>> +		dev_err(&mc_dev->dev, "Failed to setup DPRC (error = %d)\n", ret);
> nit: maybe align your error messages. Before you were using __func__,
> here you don't. Maybe don't? also you may consider using strerror(-ret)
>> +		bus_unregister_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
>> +		return ret;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	ret = dprc_scan_container(mc_dev, false);
>> +	if (ret < 0) {
>> +		dev_err(&mc_dev->dev, "Container scanning failed: %d\n", ret);
>> +		dprc_cleanup(mc_dev);
> I see dprc_cleanup is likely to fail. Generally cleanup shouldn't.
> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg2283433.html

Right, I will change the dprc_cleanup not to fail.


>> +		bus_unregister_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
> nit: here also you can factorize code doing goto unregister;
> shouldn't you reset vdev->nb.notifier_call to NULL as well. I see it is
> tested in other places.
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int vfio_fsl_mc_probe(struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev)
>>   {
>>   	struct iommu_group *group;
>> @@ -112,6 +180,12 @@ static int vfio_fsl_mc_probe(struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev)
>>   		return ret;
>>   	}
>>   
>> +	ret = vfio_fsl_mc_init_device(vdev);
>> +	if (ret < 0) {
> I think you also need to call vfio_del_group_dev(&pdev->dev)
>> +		vfio_iommu_group_put(group, dev);
>> +		return ret;
> nit: goto put_group;
>> +	}
>> +
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>>   
>> @@ -124,6 +198,16 @@ static int vfio_fsl_mc_remove(struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev)
>>   	if (!vdev)
>>   		return -EINVAL;
>>   
>> +	if (vdev->nb.notifier_call)
>> +		bus_unregister_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
>> +
>> +	if (is_fsl_mc_bus_dprc(mc_dev)) {
>> +		dprc_remove_devices(mc_dev, NULL, 0);
>> +		dprc_cleanup(mc_dev);
>> +	}
> you may consider doing the tear down in opposite order than
> vfio_fsl_mc_init_device, ie. bus_unregister_notifier after the
> dprc_cleanup? That's also what is done in vfio_fsl_mc_init_device error
> path handling.
>> +
>> +	mc_dev->mc_io = NULL;
>> +
>>   	vfio_iommu_group_put(mc_dev->dev.iommu_group, dev);
>>   
>>   	return 0;
>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h
>> index e79cc116f6b8..37d61eaa58c8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h
>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h
>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>>   
>>   struct vfio_fsl_mc_device {
>>   	struct fsl_mc_device		*mc_dev;
>> +	struct notifier_block        nb;
>>   };
>>   
>>   #endif /* VFIO_FSL_MC_PRIVATE_H */>
> Thanks
> 
> Eric
> 

Thanks,
Diana