On 06/07/2019 11:09 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 11:02:36 -0400
Farhan Ali <al...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
On 06/07/2019 10:53 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
A vfio-ccw device may provide an async command subregion for
issuing halt/clear subchannel requests. If it is present, use
it for sending halt/clear request to the device; if not, fall
back to emulation (as done today).
Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com>
---
v4->v5:
- It seems we need to take the indirection via the class for the
callbacks after all :(
- Dropped Eric's R-b: for that reason
---
hw/s390x/css.c | 27 +++++++--
hw/s390x/s390-ccw.c | 20 +++++++
hw/vfio/ccw.c | 112 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
include/hw/s390x/css.h | 3 +
include/hw/s390x/s390-ccw.h | 2 +
5 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/s390x/css.c b/hw/s390x/css.c
index ad310b9f94bc..b92395f165e6 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/css.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/css.c
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
#include "trace.h"
#include "hw/s390x/s390_flic.h"
#include "hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h"
+#include "hw/s390x/s390-ccw.h"
typedef struct CrwContainer {
CRW crw;
@@ -1205,6 +1206,26 @@ static void sch_handle_start_func_virtual(SubchDev *sch)
}
+static void sch_handle_halt_func_passthrough(SubchDev *sch)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = s390_ccw_halt(sch);
+ if (ret == -ENOSYS) {
+ sch_handle_halt_func(sch);
+ }
+}
+
+static void sch_handle_clear_func_passthrough(SubchDev *sch)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = s390_ccw_clear(sch);
+ if (ret == -ENOSYS) {
+ sch_handle_clear_func(sch);
+ }
+}
+
do we need an extra s390_ccw_clear/halt functions? can't we just call
cdc->clear/halt in the passthrough functions?
I mostly added them for symmetry reasons... we still need to check for
presence of the callback in any case, though.
(vfio is not always built, e.g. on windows or os x.)
right, but if we are calling do_subchannel_work_passthrough, then we
know for sure we are building the S390CCWDevice which is the vfio
device, no?
So we could just add checks for callbacks in
sch_handle_clear/halt_func_passthrough, no?
I would even like to get rid of the s390_ccw_cmd_request if we can, but
that is out of scope for this patch. :)
static IOInstEnding sch_handle_start_func_passthrough(SubchDev *sch)
{
SCHIB *schib = &sch->curr_status;
@@ -1244,11 +1265,9 @@ IOInstEnding do_subchannel_work_passthrough(SubchDev
*sch)
SCHIB *schib = &sch->curr_status;
if (schib->scsw.ctrl & SCSW_FCTL_CLEAR_FUNC) {
- /* TODO: Clear handling */
- sch_handle_clear_func(sch);
+ sch_handle_clear_func_passthrough(sch);
} else if (schib->scsw.ctrl & SCSW_FCTL_HALT_FUNC) {
- /* TODO: Halt handling */
- sch_handle_halt_func(sch);
+ sch_handle_halt_func_passthrough(sch);
} else if (schib->scsw.ctrl & SCSW_FCTL_START_FUNC) {
return sch_handle_start_func_passthrough(sch);
}
diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-ccw.c
index f5f025d1b6ca..951be5ab0245 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/s390-ccw.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/s390-ccw.c
@@ -29,6 +29,26 @@ IOInstEnding s390_ccw_cmd_request(SubchDev *sch)
return cdc->handle_request(sch);
}
+int s390_ccw_halt(SubchDev *sch)
+{
+ S390CCWDeviceClass *cdc = S390_CCW_DEVICE_GET_CLASS(sch->driver_data);
+
+ if (!cdc->handle_halt) {
+ return -ENOSYS;
+ }
+ return cdc->handle_halt(sch);
+}
+
+int s390_ccw_clear(SubchDev *sch)
+{
+ S390CCWDeviceClass *cdc = S390_CCW_DEVICE_GET_CLASS(sch->driver_data);
+
+ if (!cdc->handle_clear) {
+ return -ENOSYS;
+ }
+ return cdc->handle_clear(sch);
+}
+
