On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:55:40PM +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 2/5/19 6:28 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 12:30:39PM +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >> On 2/4/19 5:45 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 07:43:18PM +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >>>> This will let the guest create a memory mapping to expose the ESB MMIO
> >>>> regions used to control the interrupt sources, to trigger events, to
> >>>> EOI or to turn off the sources.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h   |  4 ++
> >>>>  arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_xive_native.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>  2 files changed, 101 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> >>>> index 8c876c166ef2..6bb61ba141c2 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> >>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> >>>> @@ -675,4 +675,8 @@ struct kvm_ppc_cpu_char {
> >>>>  #define  KVM_XICS_PRESENTED		(1ULL << 43)
> >>>>  #define  KVM_XICS_QUEUED		(1ULL << 44)
> >>>>  
> >>>> +/* POWER9 XIVE Native Interrupt Controller */
> >>>> +#define KVM_DEV_XIVE_GRP_CTRL		1
> >>>> +#define   KVM_DEV_XIVE_GET_ESB_FD	1
> >>>
> >>> Introducing a new FD for ESB and TIMA seems overkill.  Can't you get
> >>> to both with an mmap() directly on the xive device fd?  Using the
> >>> offset to distinguish which one to map, obviously.
> >>
> >> The page offset would define some sort of user API. It seems feasible.
> >> But I am not sure this would be practical in the future if we need to 
> >> tune the length.
> > 
> > Um.. why not?  I mean, yes the XIVE supports rather a lot of
> > interrupts, but we have 64-bits of offset we can play with - we can
> > leave room for billions of ESB slots and still have room for billions
> > of VPs.
> 
> So the first 4 pages could be the TIMA pages and then would come  
> the pages for the interrupt ESBs. I think that we can have different 
> vm_fault handler for each mapping.

Um.. no, I'm saying you don't need to tightly pack them.  So you could
have the ESB pages at 0, the TIMA at, say offset 2^60.

> I wonder how this will work out with pass-through. As Paul said in 
> a previous email, it would be better to let QEMU request a new 
> mapping to handle the ESB pages of the device being passed through.
> I guess this is not a special case, just another offset and length.

Right, if we need multiple "chunks" of ESB pages we can given them
each their own terabyte or several.  No need to be stingy with address
space.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson