Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 3/8] vfio: Introduce VFIO address spaces

[Alex Williamson]

On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 18:21 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> From: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> 
> The only model so far supported for VFIO passthrough devices is the model
> usually used on x86, where all of the guest's RAM is mapped into the
> (host) IOMMU and there is no IOMMU visible in the guest.
> 
> This patch begins to relax this model, introducing the notion of a
> VFIOAddressSpace.  This represents a logical DMA address space which will
> be visible to one or more VFIO devices by appropriate mapping in the (host)
> IOMMU.  Thus the currently global list of containers becomes local to
> a VFIOAddressSpace, and we verify that we don't attempt to add a VFIO
> group to multiple address spaces.
> 
> For now, only one VFIOAddressSpace is created and used, corresponding to
> main system memory, that will change in future patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> ---
>  hw/misc/vfio.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/misc/vfio.c b/hw/misc/vfio.c
> index adcd23d..bcd67a0 100644
> --- a/hw/misc/vfio.c
> +++ b/hw/misc/vfio.c
> @@ -130,9 +130,17 @@ enum {
>      VFIO_INT_MSIX = 3,
>  };
>  
> +typedef struct VFIOAddressSpace {
> +    AddressSpace *as;
> +    QLIST_HEAD(, VFIOContainer) containers;
> +} VFIOAddressSpace;
> +
> +static VFIOAddressSpace vfio_address_space_memory;
> +
>  struct VFIOGroup;
>  
>  typedef struct VFIOContainer {
> +    VFIOAddressSpace *space;
>      int fd; /* /dev/vfio/vfio, empowered by the attached groups */
>      struct {
>          /* enable abstraction to support various iommu backends */
> @@ -197,9 +205,6 @@ typedef struct VFIOGroup {
>  
>  #define MSIX_CAP_LENGTH 12
>  
> -static QLIST_HEAD(, VFIOContainer)
> -    container_list = QLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(container_list);
> -
>  static QLIST_HEAD(, VFIOGroup)
>      group_list = QLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(group_list);
>  
> @@ -2604,16 +2609,28 @@ static int vfio_load_rom(VFIODevice *vdev)
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int vfio_connect_container(VFIOGroup *group)
> +static void vfio_address_space_init(VFIOAddressSpace *space, AddressSpace 
> *as)
> +{
> +    space->as = as;
> +    QLIST_INIT(&space->containers);
> +}
> +
> +static int vfio_connect_container(VFIOGroup *group, VFIOAddressSpace *space)
>  {
>      VFIOContainer *container;
>      int ret, fd;
>  
>      if (group->container) {
> -        return 0;
> +        if (group->container->space == space) {
> +            return 0;
> +        } else {
> +            error_report("vfio: group %d used in multiple address spaces",
> +                         group->groupid);
> +            return -EBUSY;
> +        }
>      }

This original group->container test seems bogus to me, I don't think we
can get here with a container already attached to a group.
>  
> -    QLIST_FOREACH(container, &container_list, next) {
> +    QLIST_FOREACH(container, &space->containers, next) {
>          if (!ioctl(group->fd, VFIO_GROUP_SET_CONTAINER, &container->fd)) {
>              group->container = container;
>              QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&container->group_list, group, container_next);
> @@ -2636,6 +2653,7 @@ static int vfio_connect_container(VFIOGroup *group)
>      }
>  
>      container = g_malloc0(sizeof(*container));
> +    container->space = space;
>      container->fd = fd;
>  
>      if (ioctl(fd, VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION, VFIO_TYPE1_IOMMU)) {
> @@ -2658,7 +2676,8 @@ static int vfio_connect_container(VFIOGroup *group)
>          container->iommu_data.listener = vfio_memory_listener;
>          container->iommu_data.release = vfio_listener_release;
>  
> -        memory_listener_register(&container->iommu_data.listener, 
> &address_space_memory);
> +        memory_listener_register(&container->iommu_data.listener,
> +                                 container->space->as);
>      } else {
>          error_report("vfio: No available IOMMU models");
>          g_free(container);
> @@ -2667,7 +2686,7 @@ static int vfio_connect_container(VFIOGroup *group)
>      }
>  
>      QLIST_INIT(&container->group_list);
> -    QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&container_list, container, next);
> +    QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&space->containers, container, next);
>  
>      group->container = container;
>      QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&container->group_list, group, container_next);
> @@ -2698,7 +2717,7 @@ static void vfio_disconnect_container(VFIOGroup *group)
>      }
>  }
>  
> -static VFIOGroup *vfio_get_group(int groupid)
> +static VFIOGroup *vfio_get_group(int groupid, VFIOAddressSpace *space)
>  {
>      VFIOGroup *group;
>      char path[32];
> @@ -2706,7 +2725,15 @@ static VFIOGroup *vfio_get_group(int groupid)
>  
>      QLIST_FOREACH(group, &group_list, next) {
>          if (group->groupid == groupid) {
> -            return group;
> +            /* Found it.  Now is it already in the right context? */
> +            assert(group->container);

How would a group w/o a container exist?  (I really don't like asserts -
note the only assert in vfio was added by Avi).

> +            if (group->container->space == space) {
> +                return group;
> +            } else {
> +                error_report("vfio: group %d used in multiple address 
> spaces",
> +                             group->groupid);
> +                return NULL;
> +            }
>          }
>      }
>  
> @@ -2739,7 +2766,7 @@ static VFIOGroup *vfio_get_group(int groupid)
>      group->groupid = groupid;
>      QLIST_INIT(&group->device_list);
>  
> -    if (vfio_connect_container(group)) {
> +    if (vfio_connect_container(group, space)) {
>          error_report("vfio: failed to setup container for group %d", 
> groupid);
>          close(group->fd);
>          g_free(group);
> @@ -3093,7 +3120,12 @@ static int vfio_initfn(PCIDevice *pdev)
>      DPRINTF("%s(%04x:%02x:%02x.%x) group %d\n", __func__, vdev->host.domain,
>              vdev->host.bus, vdev->host.slot, vdev->host.function, groupid);
>  
> -    group = vfio_get_group(groupid);
> +    if (pci_iommu_as(pdev) != &address_space_memory) {
> +        error_report("vfio: DMA address space must be system memory");
> +        return -ENXIO;

-EFAULT?  It's a bad address of sorts.

> +    }
> +
> +    group = vfio_get_group(groupid, &vfio_address_space_memory);
>      if (!group) {
>          error_report("vfio: failed to get group %d", groupid);
>          return -ENOENT;
> @@ -3316,6 +3348,7 @@ static const TypeInfo vfio_pci_dev_info = {
>  
>  static void register_vfio_pci_dev_type(void)
>  {
> +    vfio_address_space_init(&vfio_address_space_memory, 
> &address_space_memory);


Not a fan of this here, but it's short lived, so ok.

>      type_register_static(&vfio_pci_dev_info);
>  }
>