Re: [PATCH v4] vpci/msix: fix PBA accesses

["Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 09:31:34AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 07.03.2022 17:37, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > Map the PBA in order to access it from the MSI-X read and write
> > handlers. Note that previously the handlers would pass the physical
> > host address into the {read,write}{l,q} handlers, which is wrong as
> > those expect a linear address.
> > 
> > Map the PBA using ioremap when the first access is performed. Note
> > that 32bit arches might want to abstract the call to ioremap into a
> > vPCI arch handler, so they can use a fixmap range to map the PBA.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> 
> > Cc: Alex Olson <this.is.a0lson@gmail.com>
> 
> I'll wait a little with committing, in the hope for Alex to re-provide
> a Tested-by.
> 
> > --- a/xen/drivers/vpci/msix.c
> > +++ b/xen/drivers/vpci/msix.c
> > @@ -182,6 +182,38 @@ static struct vpci_msix_entry *get_entry(struct vpci_msix *msix,
> >      return &msix->entries[(addr - start) / PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE];
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void __iomem *get_pba(struct vpci *vpci)
> > +{
> > +    struct vpci_msix *msix = vpci->msix;
> > +    /*
> > +     * PBA will only be unmapped when the device is deassigned, so access it
> > +     * without holding the vpci lock.
> > +     */
> > +    void __iomem *pba = read_atomic(&msix->pba);
> > +
> > +    if ( likely(pba) )
> > +        return pba;
> > +
> > +    pba = ioremap(vmsix_table_addr(vpci, VPCI_MSIX_PBA),
> > +                  vmsix_table_size(vpci, VPCI_MSIX_PBA));
> > +    if ( !pba )
> > +        return read_atomic(&msix->pba);
> > +
> > +    spin_lock(&vpci->lock);
> > +    if ( !msix->pba )
> > +    {
> > +        write_atomic(&msix->pba, pba);
> > +        spin_unlock(&vpci->lock);
> > +    }
> > +    else
> > +    {
> > +        spin_unlock(&vpci->lock);
> > +        iounmap(pba);
> > +    }
> 
> TBH I had been hoping for just a single spin_unlock(), but you're
> the maintainer of this code ...

Would you prefer something like:

spin_lock(&vpci->lock);
if ( !msix->pba )
    write_atomic(&msix->pba, pba);
spin_unlock(&vpci->lock);

if ( read_atomic(&msix->pba) != pba )
    iounmap(pba);

?

Thanks, Roger.