All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
To: Penny Zheng <Penny.Zheng@arm.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	"sstabellini@kernel.org" <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com>, Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] xen/arm: if 1:1 direct-map domain use native UART address and IRQ number for vPL011
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 19:00:59 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc216ec4-1aa9-609d-c492-a60c59606c56@xen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VE1PR08MB5215C5883D3913F14C6F246AF7B69@VE1PR08MB5215.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

On 12/10/2021 03:42, Penny Zheng wrote:
> Hi Julien

Hi Penny,

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 6:49 PM
>> To: Penny Zheng <Penny.Zheng@arm.com>; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org;
>> sstabellini@kernel.org
>> Cc: Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com>; Wei Chen
>> <Wei.Chen@arm.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] xen/arm: if 1:1 direct-map domain use native UART
>> address and IRQ number for vPL011
>>
>> On 09/10/2021 09:47, Penny Zheng wrote:
>>> Hi Julien
>>
>> Hi Penny,
>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 7:14 PM
>>>> To: Penny Zheng <Penny.Zheng@arm.com>;
>>>> xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; sstabellini@kernel.org
>>>> Cc: Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com>; Wei Chen
>>>> <Wei.Chen@arm.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] xen/arm: if 1:1 direct-map domain use
>>>> native UART address and IRQ number for vPL011
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 23/09/2021 08:11, Penny Zheng wrote:
>>>>> From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xilinx.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> We always use a fix address to map the vPL011 to domains. The
>>>>> address could be a problem for domains that are directly mapped.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, for domains that are directly mapped, reuse the address of the
>>>>> physical UART on the platform to avoid potential clashes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do the same for the virtual IRQ number: instead of always using
>>>>> GUEST_VPL011_SPI, try to reuse the physical SPI number if possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xilinx.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@arm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>     xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c  | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> --
>>>>>     xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c        | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>>>>     xen/include/asm-arm/vpl011.h |  2 ++
>>>>>     3 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>>>>> b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c index 120f1ae575..c92e510ae7 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>>>>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
>>>>>
>>>>>     #include <xen/irq.h>
>>>>>     #include <xen/grant_table.h>
>>>>> +#include <xen/serial.h>
>>>>>
>>>>>     static unsigned int __initdata opt_dom0_max_vcpus;
>>>>>     integer_param("dom0_max_vcpus", opt_dom0_max_vcpus); @@ -
>> 1942,8
>>>>> +1943,11 @@ static int __init make_vpl011_uart_node(struct
>>>>> +kernel_info
>>>> *kinfo)
>>>>>         gic_interrupt_t intr;
>>>>>         __be32 reg[GUEST_ROOT_ADDRESS_CELLS +
>> GUEST_ROOT_SIZE_CELLS];
>>>>>         __be32 *cells;
>>>>> +    struct domain *d = kinfo->d;
>>>>> +    char buf[27];
>>>>>
>>>>> -    res = fdt_begin_node(fdt, "sbsa-
>> uart@"__stringify(GUEST_PL011_BASE));
>>>>> +    snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "sbsa-uart@%"PRIx64, d-
>>>>> arch.vpl011.base_addr);
>>>>> +    res = fdt_begin_node(fdt, buf);
>>>>>         if ( res )
>>>>>             return res;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -1953,14 +1957,14 @@ static int __init
>>>>> make_vpl011_uart_node(struct kernel_info *kinfo)
>>>>>
>>>>>         cells = &reg[0];
>>>>>         dt_child_set_range(&cells, GUEST_ROOT_ADDRESS_CELLS,
>>>>> -                       GUEST_ROOT_SIZE_CELLS, GUEST_PL011_BASE,
>>>>> +                       GUEST_ROOT_SIZE_CELLS,
>>>>> + d->arch.vpl011.base_addr,
>>>>>                            GUEST_PL011_SIZE);
>>>>>
>>>>>         res = fdt_property(fdt, "reg", reg, sizeof(reg));
>>>>>         if ( res )
>>>>>             return res;
>>>>>
>>>>> -    set_interrupt(intr, GUEST_VPL011_SPI, 0xf, DT_IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH);
>>>>> +    set_interrupt(intr, d->arch.vpl011.virq, 0xf,
>>>>> + DT_IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH);
>>>>>
>>>>>         res = fdt_property(fdt, "interrupts", intr, sizeof (intr));
>>>>>         if ( res )
>>>>> @@ -2670,6 +2674,13 @@ static int __init construct_domU(struct
>>>>> domain
>>>> *d,
>>>>>         else
>>>>>             allocate_static_memory(d, &kinfo, node);
>>>>>
>>>>> +    /*
>>>>> +     * Initialization before creating its device
>>>>> +     * tree node in prepare_dtb_domU.
>>>>> +     */
>>>>
>>>> I think it would be better to explain *why* this needs to be done before.
>>>>
>>>>> +    if ( kinfo.vpl011 )
>>>>> +        rc = domain_vpl011_init(d, NULL);
>>>>> +
>>>>>         rc = prepare_dtb_domU(d, &kinfo);
>>>>>         if ( rc < 0 )
>>>>>             return rc;
>>>>> @@ -2678,9 +2689,6 @@ static int __init construct_domU(struct domain
>>>> *d,
>>>>>         if ( rc < 0 )
>>>>>             return rc;
>>>>>
>>>>> -    if ( kinfo.vpl011 )
>>>>> -        rc = domain_vpl011_init(d, NULL);
>>>>> -
>>>>>         return rc;
>>>>>     }
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -2723,15 +2731,27 @@ void __init create_domUs(void)
>>>>>
>>>>>             if ( !dt_property_read_u32(node, "nr_spis", &d_cfg.arch.nr_spis) )
>>>>>             {
>>>>> +            unsigned int vpl011_virq = GUEST_VPL011_SPI;
>>>>
>>>> Coding style: Add a newline here.
>>>>
>>>>>                 d_cfg.arch.nr_spis = gic_number_lines() - 32;
>>>>>
>>>>> +            /*
>>>>> +             * The VPL011 virq is GUEST_VPL011_SPI, unless direct-map in
>>>>> +             * set, in which case we'll try to match the hardware.
>>>>> +             *
>>>>> +             * Typically, d->arch.vpl011.virq has the vpl011 irq number
>>>>> +             * but at this point of the boot sequence it is not
>>>>> +             * initialized yet.
>>>>> +             */
>>>>> +            if ( direct_map && serial_irq(SERHND_DTUART) > 0 )
>>>>> +                vpl011_virq = serial_irq(SERHND_DTUART);
>>>>
>>>> I think we should not continue if the domain is direct-mapped *and*
>>>> the IRQ is not found. Otherwise, this will may just result to
>>>> potential breakage if GUEST_VPL011_SPI happens to be used for an HW
>> device.
>>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>>                 /*
>>>>>                  * vpl011 uses one emulated SPI. If vpl011 is requested, make
>>>>>                  * sure that we allocate enough SPIs for it.
>>>>>                  */
>>>>>                 if ( dt_property_read_bool(node, "vpl011") )
>>>>>                     d_cfg.arch.nr_spis = MAX(d_cfg.arch.nr_spis,
>>>>> -                                         GUEST_VPL011_SPI - 32 + 1);
>>>>> +                                         vpl011_virq - 32 + 1);
>>>>>             }
>>>>>
>>>>>             /*
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c b/xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c index
>>>>> 895f436cc4..10df25f098 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c
>>>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>>>>>     #include <xen/mm.h>
>>>>>     #include <xen/sched.h>
>>>>>     #include <xen/console.h>
>>>>> +#include <xen/serial.h>
>>>>>     #include <public/domctl.h>
>>>>>     #include <public/io/console.h>
>>>>>     #include <asm/pl011-uart.h>
>>>>> @@ -71,11 +72,11 @@ static void
>>>>> vpl011_update_interrupt_status(struct
>>>> domain *d)
>>>>>          * status bit has been set since the last time.
>>>>>          */
>>>>>         if ( uartmis & ~vpl011->shadow_uartmis )
>>>>> -        vgic_inject_irq(d, NULL, GUEST_VPL011_SPI, true);
>>>>> +        vgic_inject_irq(d, NULL, vpl011->virq, true);
>>>>>
>>>>>         vpl011->shadow_uartmis = uartmis;
>>>>>     #else
>>>>> -    vgic_inject_irq(d, NULL, GUEST_VPL011_SPI, uartmis);
>>>>> +    vgic_inject_irq(d, NULL, vpl011->virq, uartmis);
>>>>>     #endif
>>>>>     }
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -347,7 +348,8 @@ static int vpl011_mmio_read(struct vcpu *v,
>>>>>                                 void *priv)
>>>>>     {
>>>>>         struct hsr_dabt dabt = info->dabt;
>>>>> -    uint32_t vpl011_reg = (uint32_t)(info->gpa - GUEST_PL011_BASE);
>>>>> +    uint32_t vpl011_reg = (uint32_t)(info->gpa -
>>>>> +
>>>>> + v->domain->arch.vpl011.base_addr);
>>>>>         struct vpl011 *vpl011 = &v->domain->arch.vpl011;
>>>>>         struct domain *d = v->domain;
>>>>>         unsigned long flags;
>>>>> @@ -430,7 +432,8 @@ static int vpl011_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v,
>>>>>                                  void *priv)
>>>>>     {
>>>>>         struct hsr_dabt dabt = info->dabt;
>>>>> -    uint32_t vpl011_reg = (uint32_t)(info->gpa - GUEST_PL011_BASE);
>>>>> +    uint32_t vpl011_reg = (uint32_t)(info->gpa -
>>>>> +
>>>>> + v->domain->arch.vpl011.base_addr);
>>>>>         struct vpl011 *vpl011 = &v->domain->arch.vpl011;
>>>>>         struct domain *d = v->domain;
>>>>>         unsigned long flags;
>>>>> @@ -622,10 +625,27 @@ int domain_vpl011_init(struct domain *d,
>>>>> struct
>>>> vpl011_init_info *info)
>>>>>     {
>>>>>         int rc;
>>>>>         struct vpl011 *vpl011 = &d->arch.vpl011;
>>>>> +    const struct vuart_info *uart =
>>>>> + serial_vuart_info(SERHND_DTUART);
>>>>>
>>>>>         if ( vpl011->backend.dom.ring_buf )
>>>>>             return -EINVAL;
>>>>>
>>>>> +    vpl011->base_addr = GUEST_PL011_BASE;
>>>>> +    vpl011->virq = GUEST_VPL011_SPI;
>>>>> +    if ( is_domain_direct_mapped(d) )
>>>>> +    {
>>>>> +        if ( uart != NULL && serial_irq(SERHND_DTUART) > 0 )
>>>>> +        {
>>>>> +            vpl011->base_addr = uart->base_addr;
>>>>> +            vpl011->virq = serial_irq(SERHND_DTUART);
>>>>
>>>> This seems a bit pointless to call serial_irq() twice. How about add
>>>> a field in vuart_info to return the interrupt number?
>>>>
>>>>> +        }
>>>>> +        else
>>>>> +            printk(XENLOG_ERR
>>>>> +                   "Unable to reuse physical UART address and irq for vPL011.\n"
>>>>> +                   "Defaulting to addr %#"PRIpaddr" and IRQ %u\n",
>>>>> +                   vpl011->base_addr, vpl011->virq);
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>>         /*
>>>>>          * info is NULL when the backend is in Xen.
>>>>>          * info is != NULL when the backend is in a domain.
>>>>> @@ -661,7 +681,7 @@ int domain_vpl011_init(struct domain *d, struct
>>>> vpl011_init_info *info)
>>>>>             }
>>>>>         }
>>>>>
>>>>> -    rc = vgic_reserve_virq(d, GUEST_VPL011_SPI);
>>>>> +    rc = vgic_reserve_virq(d, vpl011->virq);
>>>>>         if ( !rc )
>>>>>         {
>>>>>             rc = -EINVAL;
>>>>> @@ -673,12 +693,12 @@ int domain_vpl011_init(struct domain *d,
>>>>> struct
>>>> vpl011_init_info *info)
>>>>>         spin_lock_init(&vpl011->lock);
>>>>>
>>>>>         register_mmio_handler(d, &vpl011_mmio_handler,
>>>>> -                          GUEST_PL011_BASE, GUEST_PL011_SIZE, NULL);
>>>>> +                          vpl011->base_addr, GUEST_PL011_SIZE,
>>>>> + NULL);
>>>>
>>>> So you are making the assumpption that the UART region will be equal
>>>> to (or
>>>> bigger) than GUEST_PL011_SIZE. There are definitely UART out where
>>>> the MMIO region is smaller than 4K.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry. I got a few confused here, since I am not very familiar with pl011/UART
>> knowledge.
>>>
>>> Problems will occur when UART region is bigger than GUEST_PL011_SIZE,
>>> since we are only considering MMIO region of [vpl011->base_addr, vpl011-
>>> base_addr + GUEST_PL011_SIZE], right?
>>
>> It is in fact the other way around. The problem will appear if the host UART
>> MMIO region is smaller than the one we will emulate for the guest PL011.
>>
> 
> Sorry to keep bothering.
> Is it that because when the UART MMIO region is smaller than the one we emulated,
> register(DR, RSR, FR, ...) will not be at the place where we emulated?

Let me give an example to clarify my point. On some Hardware (IIRC 
pine64), the UART MMIO region is less than 4KB. In fact, there are 
multiple device within the same 4KB region.

At the moment, we are removing those devices because we can't assign to 
a domain a region that is not page aligned (4KB today). But I can see 
some benefits to be able to assign such devices to different domain/xen. 
To support them, we would need to trap the region and then forward only 
access to address the domain can access.

The PL011 we emulate for the guest require a 4KB region. So this would 
overlap with other device in the same region we may want to trap.

For is not an issue for the reasons I mentionned above. However, I think 
it is a good idea to harden the code and add a check/comment when we 
know potential pitfalls.

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall


  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-13 18:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-23  3:11 [PATCH 00/11] 1:1 direct-map memory map Penny Zheng
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 01/11] xen: reserve flags for internal usage in xen_domctl_createdomain Penny Zheng
2021-09-23  9:54   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-28 12:05     ` Jan Beulich
2021-10-11 10:45       ` Julien Grall
2021-10-11 11:13         ` Jan Beulich
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 02/11] xen/arm: introduce XEN_DOMCTL_INTERNAL_directmap Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:00   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 03/11] xen/arm: introduce 1:1 direct-map for domUs Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:36   ` Julien Grall
2021-10-08  2:19     ` Penny Zheng
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 04/11] xen/arm: introduce accessors for vgic dist, cpu, and rdist base addresses Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:45   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 05/11] xen/arm: vgic: introduce vgic.cbase Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:47   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 06/11] xen/arm: new vgic: update vgic_cpu_base Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:47   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 07/11] xen/arm: if 1:1 direct-map domain use native addresses for GICv2 Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:52   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 08/11] xen/arm: if 1:1 direct-map domain use native addresses for GICv3 Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 10:59   ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 09/11] xen/arm: if 1:1 direct-map domain use native UART address and IRQ number for vPL011 Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 11:14   ` Julien Grall
2021-10-09  8:47     ` Penny Zheng
2021-10-11 10:49       ` Julien Grall
2021-10-12  2:42         ` Penny Zheng
2021-10-13 18:00           ` Julien Grall [this message]
2021-10-14  2:31             ` Penny Zheng
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 10/11] xen/arm: device assignment on 1:1 direct-map domain Penny Zheng
2021-09-23 11:26   ` Julien Grall
2021-10-09  9:40     ` Penny Zheng
2021-10-11 11:14       ` Julien Grall
2021-10-12  2:29         ` Penny Zheng
2021-10-13  7:44         ` Penny Zheng
2021-10-13  7:51           ` Penny Zheng
2021-10-13 16:34             ` Julien Grall
2021-09-23  3:11 ` [PATCH 11/11] xen/docs: add a document to explain how to do passthrough without IOMMU Penny Zheng

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=dc216ec4-1aa9-609d-c492-a60c59606c56@xen.org \
    --to=julien@xen.org \
    --cc=Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com \
    --cc=Penny.Zheng@arm.com \
    --cc=Wei.Chen@arm.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.