From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71134C433DB for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 09:39:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAC4461964 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 09:39:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CAC4461964 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:36832 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQoMs-0003Tx-P8 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:39:30 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52218) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQoLk-0002ul-GW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:38:20 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:26681) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQoLf-0004bO-Q4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:38:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1617010693; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=EgulBuW4Y4tnspUkj9T2xcU0bZcCRros9KNKLTR+qSE=; b=GQQePdXDI+5GEBqDHJmB9Gpp7eBQRInWTEoPIeTCSfN/uS3VQD9hduwcsSfGkSg+TtKDVz qU2TOze5tlmZ/OW5DWndRvJshvr15w7lbS20/PiSlFzbOKOtd6rh/xgErqvA6wmpr4ORFn 37+D4MW730+LbCDMuoj9DXuUgXGT0tY= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-430-dzWiDXJ1Ouakoe7_P6Hv1w-1; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 05:38:10 -0400 X-MC-Unique: dzWiDXJ1Ouakoe7_P6Hv1w-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id z17so8389421wrv.23 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 02:38:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EgulBuW4Y4tnspUkj9T2xcU0bZcCRros9KNKLTR+qSE=; b=ITwKjKijheg54sMM9AwRg4kPk1mNSXESTzU6p3k21v11F0bunSIgoPAKEpqNg6ZSyp yLRjjXVxwupWcUol65Es8m9o1iXayfXlAzS3aSUFsMYw0SHtaiBX2/wCFQiaqOTyoZSA vehCXPNH9HUQUS9DlE3n/YmFdOcb0qnfiB53rKUjvTj/kad4QGOjOrYoOG/6Jo/UD1rC w2qR0bdesmAtX+VBHGLV5OmpPLRICMSBcOedjrUIn3aS/y7Dxro4MOk86tvI4YkUSEhq 6i0sY8yjFtnrn8jFlVn3Z+NR11HYvc7uMkGRRZ0nvlX8UG3TBsd4c8EjqAzqTJ01Qiiz hFew== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532T88AQrmfDCC2FgMukI86Mn17BeqkQgcfphS1BH4UVBlUsXJtB Zrsw5WkIbnT03MtKNvScHUJCTN+DPFPoN8T7sosngGSPY4zuQhkTajpN7TY+YK2/JMjFCalh+h9 RxFLya6xWN+HAmPA= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6241:: with SMTP id w62mr23893124wmb.79.1617010688890; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 02:38:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxZR6FgfbiK+pA/1tA0BJMaEDbjMLG3z5jQyJTRMzyGkhQWxMENwATpiTN9fVphbQLQkVCNMA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6241:: with SMTP id w62mr23893104wmb.79.1617010688682; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 02:38:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:b07:6468:f312:5e2c:eb9a:a8b6:fd3e? ([2001:b07:6468:f312:5e2c:eb9a:a8b6:fd3e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j20sm23129986wmp.30.2021.03.29.02.38.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 02:38:07 -0700 (PDT) To: David Gibson , Igor Mammedov References: <8b79c207-f653-9eec-77f1-ea46c7c75ad5@gmail.com> <87mtvczvzw.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <98d44670-5a63-1feb-aad8-9dbc62cf2e7a@gmail.com> <875z1w7ptm.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20210323140636.1a89eaab@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [RFC] adding a generic QAPI event for failed device hotunplug Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 11:38:05 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=pbonzini@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=pbonzini@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , michael.roth@amd.com, Daniel Henrique Barboza , Julia Suvorova , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Markus Armbruster , Juan Quintela , "qemu-ppc@nongnu.org" , Laine Stump , jfreimann@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 29/03/21 07:35, David Gibson wrote: >> regarding unplug - on device_del QEMU raises SCI interrupt, after this the process is >> asynchronous. When ACPI interpreter gets SCI it sends a respective _EJ0 event to >> devices mentioned in PCI_DOWN_BASE register. After getting the event, guest OS may > > Ok. Is PCI_DOWN_BASE an actual emulated hardware register, or one of > the invented ones you mention above? It's invented. Which is perhaps not the best word because the point of ACPI is exactly to let vendor provide a standardized interface that abstracts any register they invent. Even when QEMU emulates actual chipset registers, operating systems usually access those registers through the ACPI interpreter (i.e. through bytecode provided by QEMU). > Either way, I'm assuming there must be a PCI_DOWN_BASE register for > each PCI bus, yes? How is that implemented for PCI to PCI bridges? Yes (though they are multiplexed on the same I/O port using a bus-selection register). >> Also it doesn't feature pending removal on reboot, that our ACPI PCI hotplug code has. Ok, so that is what I was remembering. Paolo