On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 08:12:58AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > Quoting David Gibson (2015-03-04 22:30:40) > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 07:37:08AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > Quoting Michael Roth (2015-03-03 23:50:34) > > > > Quoting David Gibson (2015-03-02 23:33:39) > > > > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:40:16PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > > Quoting David Gibson (2015-03-02 01:02:46) > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:11:07PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > > > > This interface is used to fetch an OF device-tree nodes that > > > > > > > > describes a > > > > > > > > newly-attached device to guest. It is called multiple times to > > > > > > > > walk the > > > > > > > > device-tree node and fetch individual properties into a > > > > > > > > 'workarea'/buffer > > > > > > > > provided by the guest. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The device-tree is generated by QEMU and passed to an > > > > > > > > sPAPRDRConnector during > > > > > > > > the initial hotplug operation, and the state of these RTAS > > > > > > > > calls is tracked by > > > > > > > > the sPAPRDRConnector. When the last of these properties is > > > > > > > > successfully > > > > > > > > fetched, we report as special return value to the guest and > > > > > > > > transition > > > > > > > > the device to a 'configured' state on the QEMU/DRC side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See docs/specs/ppc-spapr-hotplug.txt for a complete description > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > this interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, actually, here's probably the best place to explain what I > > > > > > > had in > > > > > > > mind for changing the internal interface for this stuff. I was > > > > > > > thinking something like this pseudocode: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > struct DRCCCState { > > > > > > > void *fdt; > > > > > > > int offset; > > > > > > > int depth; > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rtas_configure_connector() > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > DRCCCState *ccstate; > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* check parameters, retrieve drc */ > > > > > > > ccstate = drc->ccstate; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (!ccstate) { > > > > > > > /* Haven't started configuring yet */ > > > > > > > ccstate = malloc(...); > > > > > > > /* Retrieve the dt fragment from the backend */ > > > > > > > ccstate->fdt = drck->get_dt(...); > > > > > > > ccstate->offset = 0; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while (get next tag from fdt) { > > > > > > > switch (tag) > > > > > > > case FDT_PROPERTY: > > > > > > > /* Translate property into rtas return > > > > > > > values */ > > > > > > > return SPAPR_DR_CC_RESPONSE_NEXT_PROPERTY; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* other cases ... */ > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* Fall through only if we've completed streaming out the > > > > > > > dt > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* Tell the back end we've finished configuring */ > > > > > > > drck->cc_completed(...); > > > > > > > return SPAPR_DR_CC_RESPONSE_SUCCESS; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On reset, or anything else which interrupts the configuration > > > > > > > process, > > > > > > > just blow away drc->ccstate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, that seems reasonable. I took a stab at it here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/commit/79ce372743da1b63a6fa33e3de1f1daba8ea1fdc > > > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/commits/spapr-hotplug-pci > > > > > > > > > > It's looking pretty close now, thanks for the rework. > > > > > > > > > > > It exposes the ccstate as you suggested, via drck->get_cc_state(), > > > > > > and in > > > > > > place of drck->cc_completed() I have drck->set_configured() which > > > > > > serves > > > > > > roughly the same purpose I think. I opted not to let RTAS handle > > > > > > allocation, since it seemed to imply RTAS owns it and not the DRC. > > > > > > > > > > So, that was intentional; basically RTAS *does* own the CCstate. But > > > > > for convenience of index we need connect it to the DRC. Think of it > > > > > like an rtas_priv field in the DRC. > > > > > > > > > > In particular I think the CCstate should be opaque to everything > > > > > except the RTAS code itself, which means initializing the offset and > > > > > depth in RTAS, not in a drck callback. As far as the drck callback > > > > > is concerned, it's supplying a dt fragment, but it doesn't care about > > > > > the details of how the upper layer communicates that through to the > > > > > guest. > > > > > > > > Ah ok, so it was about moving the CCState out of DRC, and not just the > > > > awkward interface that wraps FDT traversal. So I went ahead and did it > > > > as you suggested, but also making it actually opaque, and relying on > > > > a couple callbacks that configure-connector passes to > > > > drc->begin_configure_connector to handle init/reset of the CCState > > > > fields (such as the fdt, and the start offset (which isn't necessarilly > > > > 0)): > > > > > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/commits/spapr-hotplug-pci > > > > > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/commit/732aa10fa2e41951c396373e7df7d31861322531 > > > > > > > > I think I have all your other comments addressed, so if that looks ok > > > > I'll post v7 soon. Thanks! > > > > > > Yikes, just noticed a use-after-free in the new code. Fixed here: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/commit/3fd03f649dc5cd34aa6e2544d38855dd0f8b3708 > > > > Ok, I'm now getting myself a bit tangled in the various revisions. > > However looking at > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/commit/732aa10fa2e41951c396373e7df7d31861322531 > > > > The ->begin_configure_connector stuff seems unnecessarily > > complicated. Couldn't you just have begin_configure_connector() > > return the fdt, then initialize ccs in rtas_ibm_configure_connector() > > itself, avoiding the callback-from-a-callback. > > We need the fdt, as well as the fdt starting offset, to initialize the CCS.
Do you actually have a use-case for a non-zero starting offset? Or
could you simplify by having the individual PCI device always create
its fdt fragment at offset 0.
> I think it's a matter a of taste whether that's those are returned separately,
> or through a callback passed via begin_configure_connector. The approach I
> took just seemed a bit more instructive about what data was needed,
> and why.
> drck->get_fdt() and drck->get_fdt_starting_offset() instead of the
> callback seemed a bit much too specific in purpose to warrant a general
> interface, and it since we seem to need a reset_ccs anyway (see below),
> init_ccs seemed like a good place to contain those values.
Um.. I'm a bit confused by this. You could return both the fdt
pointert and offset as one call using pointers or a structure return
value without needing to invoke a callback-from-a-callback.
> I am fine with just initializing ccs via get_fdt()/get_fdt_starting_offset()
> beforehand though, but I do think we're stuck with a reset_ccs callback
> if we're agreed on drck->get_configure_connector_state() == NULL being
> the primary means to invalidate CCS state.
Hm. I'll have to take another look. I'd really like to keep things
to a single set of callbacks if possible, rather than having both
callbacks and counter-callbacks, or whatever you want to call them.
> > I'm also not sure that reset_ccs is worth abstracting. I think it
> > would be reasonable just to say that freeing and setting to NULL the
> > ccs link is sufficient.
>
> But after allocation, rtas_configure_connector hands over the ccs link
> to DRC, and it's local copy goes out of scope. The only way to retrieve
> it is via get_configure_connector_state(), so if the idea is to return
> NULL open reset, we have no way to free the ccs structure. If we simply
> have DRC free it, we violate the idea that ccs state is opaque. So given
> the init_ccs callback above, it made sense to handle the free via a
> reset_ccs.
>
> >
> > That said, the current reset_ccs doesn't appear to be quite right,
> > since it frees the ccs structure, but not the fdt fragment it points
> > to. I'm not sure how awkward it would be to force them into a common
> > allocation to avoid that.
>
> You mean freeing the actual FDT data? In this case the FDT pointer is
> simply a pointer to the copy the DRC has, and the lifecycle of the FDT
> is tied to the device lifecycle, and spans beyond that of a CCS (since
> we can configure/unconfigure the same device multiple times without
> unplugging in between)
Oh, ok. Why do you need a copy in ccstate then? The rtas code has
access to the drc structure as well.
--
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
pgpQD5jBmZzu7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
