qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>
To: Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
	Qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>,
	Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>,
	Qemu-ppc <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH updated v2] spapr: Fix EEH capability issue on KVM guest for PCI passthru
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 17:03:14 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c9bd838-5199-3706-583e-6b55eafacb6a@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <162022601665.118720.1424074431457537864.stgit@jupiter>



On 5/5/21 11:48 AM, Mahesh Salgaonkar wrote:
> With upstream kernel, especially after commit 98ba956f6a389
> ("powerpc/pseries/eeh: Rework device EEH PE determination") we see that KVM
> guest isn't able to enable EEH option for PCI pass-through devices anymore.
> 
> [root@atest-guest ~]# dmesg | grep EEH
> [    0.032337] EEH: pSeries platform initialized
> [    0.298207] EEH: No capable adapters found: recovery disabled.
> [root@atest-guest ~]#
> 
> So far the linux kernel was assuming pe_config_addr equal to device's
> config_addr and using it to enable EEH on the PE through ibm,set-eeh-option
> RTAS call. Which wasn't the correct way as per PAPR. The linux kernel
> commit 98ba956f6a389 fixed this flow. With that fixed, linux now uses PE
> config address returned by ibm,get-config-addr-info2 RTAS call to enable
> EEH option per-PE basis instead of per-device basis. However this has
> uncovered a bug in qemu where ibm,set-eeh-option is treating PE config
> address as per-device config address.
> 
> Hence in qemu guest with recent kernel the ibm,set-eeh-option RTAS call
> fails with -3 return value indicating that there is no PCI device exist for
> the specified PE config address. The rtas_ibm_set_eeh_option call uses
> pci_find_device() to get the PC device that matches specific bus and devfn
> extracted from PE config address passed as argument. Thus it tries to map
> the PE config address to a single specific PCI device 'bus->devices[devfn]'
> which always results into checking device on slot 0 'bus->devices[0]'.
> This succeeds when there is a pass-through device (vfio-pci) present in
> slot 0. But in cases where there is no pass-through device present in slot
> 0, but present in non-zero slots, ibm,set-eeh-option call fails to enable
> the EEH capability.
> 
> hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c: spapr_phb_vfio_eeh_set_option()
>     case RTAS_EEH_ENABLE: {
>          PCIHostState *phb;
>          PCIDevice *pdev;
> 
>          /*
>           * The EEH functionality is enabled on basis of PCI device,
>           * instead of PE. We need check the validity of the PCI
>           * device address.
>           */
>          phb = PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(sphb);
>          pdev = pci_find_device(phb->bus,
>                                 (addr >> 16) & 0xFF, (addr >> 8) & 0xFF);
>          if (!pdev || !object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pdev), "vfio-pci")) {
>              return RTAS_OUT_PARAM_ERROR;
>          }
> 
> hw/pci/pci.c:pci_find_device()
> 
> PCIDevice *pci_find_device(PCIBus *bus, int bus_num, uint8_t devfn)
> {
>      bus = pci_find_bus_nr(bus, bus_num);
> 
>      if (!bus)
>          return NULL;
> 
>      return bus->devices[devfn];
> }
> 
> This patch fixes ibm,set-eeh-option to check for presence of any PCI device
> (vfio-pci) under specified bus and enable the EEH if found. The current
> code already makes sure that all the devices on that bus are from same
> iommu group (within same PE) and fail very early if it does not.
> 
> After this fix guest is able to find EEH capable devices and enable EEH
> recovery on it.
> 
> [root@atest-guest ~]# dmesg | grep EEH
> [    0.048139] EEH: pSeries platform initialized
> [    0.405115] EEH: Capable adapter found: recovery enabled.
> [root@atest-guest ~]#
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>

> Change in v2:
> - Fix ibm,set-eeh-option instead of returning per-device PE config address.
> - Changed patch subject line.
> ---
>   hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c
> index e0547b1740..b30020da6a 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_pci_vfio.c
> @@ -47,6 +47,16 @@ void spapr_phb_vfio_reset(DeviceState *qdev)
>       spapr_phb_vfio_eeh_reenable(SPAPR_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(qdev));
>   }
>   
> +static void spapr_eeh_pci_find_device(PCIBus *bus, PCIDevice *pdev,
> +                                      void *opaque)
> +{
> +    bool *found = opaque;
> +
> +    if (object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pdev), "vfio-pci")) {
> +        *found = true;
> +    }
> +}
> +
>   int spapr_phb_vfio_eeh_set_option(SpaprPhbState *sphb,
>                                     unsigned int addr, int option)
>   {
> @@ -59,17 +69,20 @@ int spapr_phb_vfio_eeh_set_option(SpaprPhbState *sphb,
>           break;
>       case RTAS_EEH_ENABLE: {
>           PCIHostState *phb;
> -        PCIDevice *pdev;
> +        bool found = false;
>   
>           /*
> -         * The EEH functionality is enabled on basis of PCI device,
> -         * instead of PE. We need check the validity of the PCI
> -         * device address.
> +         * The EEH functionality is enabled per sphb level instead of
> +         * per PCI device. We just need to check the validity of the PCI
> +         * pass-through devices (vfio-pci) under this sphb bus.
> +         * We have already validated that all the devices under this sphb
> +         * are from same iommu group (within same PE) before comming here.
>            */
>           phb = PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(sphb);
> -        pdev = pci_find_device(phb->bus,
> -                               (addr >> 16) & 0xFF, (addr >> 8) & 0xFF);
> -        if (!pdev || !object_dynamic_cast(OBJECT(pdev), "vfio-pci")) {
> +        pci_for_each_device(phb->bus, (addr >> 16) & 0xFF,
> +                            spapr_eeh_pci_find_device, &found);
> +
> +        if (!found) {
>               return RTAS_OUT_PARAM_ERROR;
>           }
>   
> 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-10 20:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-05 14:48 [PATCH updated v2] spapr: Fix EEH capability issue on KVM guest for PCI passthru Mahesh Salgaonkar
2021-05-10 20:03 ` Daniel Henrique Barboza [this message]
2021-05-13  3:08 ` David Gibson
2021-05-14  2:03   ` Oliver O'Halloran
2021-05-17  6:36     ` David Gibson

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=9c9bd838-5199-3706-583e-6b55eafacb6a@gmail.com \
    --to=danielhb413@gmail.com \
    --cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
    --cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=oohall@gmail.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).