[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 4/4] hw/apci: handle 64-bit MMIO regions corr
From: |
Igor Mammedov |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 4/4] hw/apci: handle 64-bit MMIO regions correctly |
Date: |
Mon, 16 May 2016 13:19:47 +0200 |
On Sun, 15 May 2016 22:23:34 +0300
Marcel Apfelbaum <address@hidden> wrote:
> In build_crs(), the calculation and merging of the ranges already happens
> in 64-bit, but the entry boundaries are silently truncated to 32-bit in the
> call to aml_dword_memory(). Fix it by handling the 64-bit MMIO ranges
> separately.
> This fixes 64-bit BARs behind PXBs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcel Apfelbaum <address@hidden>
> ---
> hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 53
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> index 78f25ef..aaf4a34 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> @@ -739,18 +739,22 @@ static void crs_range_free(gpointer data)
> typedef struct CrsRangeSet {
> GPtrArray *io_ranges;
> GPtrArray *mem_ranges;
> + GPtrArray *mem_64bit_ranges;
> } CrsRangeSet;
>
> static void crs_range_set_init(CrsRangeSet *range_set)
> {
> range_set->io_ranges = g_ptr_array_new_with_free_func(crs_range_free);
> range_set->mem_ranges = g_ptr_array_new_with_free_func(crs_range_free);
> + range_set->mem_64bit_ranges =
> + g_ptr_array_new_with_free_func(crs_range_free);
> }
>
> static void crs_range_set_free(CrsRangeSet *range_set)
> {
> g_ptr_array_free(range_set->io_ranges, true);
> g_ptr_array_free(range_set->mem_ranges, true);
> + g_ptr_array_free(range_set->mem_64bit_ranges, true);
> }
>
> static gint crs_range_compare(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b)
> @@ -908,8 +912,14 @@ static Aml *build_crs(PCIHostState *host, CrsRangeSet
> *range_set)
> * that do not support multiple root buses
> */
> if (range_base && range_base <= range_limit) {
> - crs_range_insert(temp_range_set.mem_ranges,
> - range_base, range_limit);
> + uint64_t length = range_limit - range_base + 1;
> + if (range_limit <= UINT32_MAX && length <= UINT32_MAX) {
> + crs_range_insert(temp_range_set.mem_ranges,
> + range_base, range_limit);
> + } else {
> + crs_range_insert(temp_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges,
> + range_base, range_limit);
> + }
> }
>
> range_base =
> @@ -922,8 +932,14 @@ static Aml *build_crs(PCIHostState *host, CrsRangeSet
> *range_set)
> * that do not support multiple root buses
> */
> if (range_base && range_base <= range_limit) {
> - crs_range_insert(temp_range_set.mem_ranges,
> - range_base, range_limit);
> + uint64_t length = range_limit - range_base + 1;
> + if (range_limit <= UINT32_MAX && length <= UINT32_MAX) {
> + crs_range_insert(temp_range_set.mem_ranges,
> + range_base, range_limit);
> + } else {
> + crs_range_insert(temp_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges,
> + range_base, range_limit);
> + }
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -951,6 +967,19 @@ static Aml *build_crs(PCIHostState *host, CrsRangeSet
> *range_set)
> crs_range_insert(range_set->mem_ranges, entry->base, entry->limit);
> }
>
> + crs_range_merge(temp_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges);
> + for (i = 0; i < temp_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges->len; i++) {
> + entry = g_ptr_array_index(temp_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges, i);
> + aml_append(crs,
> + aml_qword_memory(AML_POS_DECODE, AML_MIN_FIXED,
> + AML_MAX_FIXED, AML_NON_CACHEABLE,
> + AML_READ_WRITE,
> + 0, entry->base, entry->limit, 0,
> + entry->limit - entry->base + 1));
> + crs_range_insert(range_set->mem_64bit_ranges,
> + entry->base, entry->limit);
> + }
instead of adding another field, wouldn't following be a simpler approach:
for (i = 0; i < temp_range_set.mem_ranges->len; i++) {
entry = g_ptr_array_index(temp_range_set.mem_ranges, i);
if (range_limit <= UINT32_MAX && length <= UINT32_MAX) {
aml_dword_memory(...);
} else {
aml_qword_memory(...);
}
> +
> crs_range_set_free(&temp_range_set);
>
> aml_append(crs,
> @@ -2182,11 +2211,17 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, GArray *linker,
> }
>
> if (pci->w64.begin) {
> - aml_append(crs,
> - aml_qword_memory(AML_POS_DECODE, AML_MIN_FIXED, AML_MAX_FIXED,
> - AML_CACHEABLE, AML_READ_WRITE,
> - 0, pci->w64.begin, pci->w64.end - 1, 0,
> - pci->w64.end - pci->w64.begin));
> + crs_replace_with_free_ranges(crs_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges,
> + pci->w64.begin, pci->w64.end - 1);
> + for (i = 0; i < crs_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges->len; i++) {
> + entry = g_ptr_array_index(crs_range_set.mem_64bit_ranges, i);
> + aml_append(crs,
> + aml_qword_memory(AML_POS_DECODE, AML_MIN_FIXED,
> + AML_MAX_FIXED,
> + AML_CACHEABLE, AML_READ_WRITE,
> + 0, entry->base, entry->limit,
> + 0, entry->limit - entry->base + 1));
> + }
> }
>
> if (misc->tpm_version != TPM_VERSION_UNSPEC) {
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 2/4] pci: reserve 64 bit MMIO range for PCI hotplug, (continued)
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 1/4] hw/pc: extract reserved memory end computation to a standalone function, Marcel Apfelbaum, 2016/05/15
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 3/4] acpi: refactor pxb crs computation, Marcel Apfelbaum, 2016/05/15
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 4/4] hw/apci: handle 64-bit MMIO regions correctly, Marcel Apfelbaum, 2016/05/15
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 0/4] pci: better support for 64-bit MMIO allocation, Igor Mammedov, 2016/05/18
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V2 0/4] pci: better support for 64-bit MMIO allocation, Marcel Apfelbaum, 2016/05/18