Hi Oleksandr,

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 3:11 pm, Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushche...@epam.com>
> 
> vPCI may map and unmap PCI device memory (BARs) being passed through which
> may take a lot of time. For this those operations may be deferred to be
> performed later, so that they can be safely preempted.
> 
> Currently this deferred processing is happening in common IOREQ code
> which doesn't seem to be the right place for x86 and is even more
> doubtful because IOREQ may not be enabled for Arm at all.
> So, for Arm the pending vPCI work may have no chance to be executed
> if the processing is left as is in the common IOREQ code only.
> For that reason make vPCI processing happen in arch specific code.
> 
> Please be aware that there are a few outstanding TODOs affecting this
> code path, see xen/drivers/vpci/header.c:map_range and
> xen/drivers/vpci/header.c:vpci_process_pending.
> 
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
> Cc: Paul Durrant <p...@xen.org>
> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushche...@epam.com>
> [x86 changes]
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org>

Reviewed-by: Rahul Singh <rahul.si...@arm.com>
Tested-by: Rahul Singh <rahul.si...@arm.com>

Regards,
Rahul
> ---
> Since v2:
> - update commit message with more insight on x86, IOREQ and Arm
> - restored order of invocation for IOREQ and vPCI processing (Jan)
> Since v1:
> - Moved the check for pending vpci work from the common IOREQ code
>   to hvm_do_resume on x86
> - Re-worked the code for Arm to ensure we don't miss pending vPCI work
> ---
> xen/arch/arm/traps.c   | 13 +++++++++++++
> xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c |  6 ++++++
> xen/common/ioreq.c     |  9 ---------
> 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
> index 219ab3c3fbde..b246f51086e3 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
> #include <xen/symbols.h>
> #include <xen/version.h>
> #include <xen/virtual_region.h>
> +#include <xen/vpci.h>
> 
> #include <public/sched.h>
> #include <public/xen.h>
> @@ -2304,6 +2305,18 @@ static bool check_for_vcpu_work(void)
>     }
> #endif
> 
> +    if ( has_vpci(v->domain) )
> +    {
> +        bool pending;
> +
> +        local_irq_enable();
> +        pending = vpci_process_pending(v);
> +        local_irq_disable();
> +
> +        if ( pending )
> +            return true;
> +    }
> +
>     if ( likely(!v->arch.need_flush_to_ram) )
>         return false;
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> index aa418a3ca1b7..c491242e4b8b 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -546,6 +546,12 @@ void hvm_do_resume(struct vcpu *v)
> 
>     pt_restore_timer(v);
> 
> +    if ( has_vpci(v->domain) && vpci_process_pending(v) )
> +    {
> +        raise_softirq(SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ);
> +        return;
> +    }
> +
>     if ( !vcpu_ioreq_handle_completion(v) )
>         return;
> 
> diff --git a/xen/common/ioreq.c b/xen/common/ioreq.c
> index d732dc045df9..689d256544c8 100644
> --- a/xen/common/ioreq.c
> +++ b/xen/common/ioreq.c
> @@ -25,9 +25,7 @@
> #include <xen/lib.h>
> #include <xen/paging.h>
> #include <xen/sched.h>
> -#include <xen/softirq.h>
> #include <xen/trace.h>
> -#include <xen/vpci.h>
> 
> #include <asm/guest_atomics.h>
> #include <asm/ioreq.h>
> @@ -212,19 +210,12 @@ static bool wait_for_io(struct ioreq_vcpu *sv, ioreq_t 
> *p)
> 
> bool vcpu_ioreq_handle_completion(struct vcpu *v)
> {
> -    struct domain *d = v->domain;
>     struct vcpu_io *vio = &v->io;
>     struct ioreq_server *s;
>     struct ioreq_vcpu *sv;
>     enum vio_completion completion;
>     bool res = true;
> 
> -    if ( has_vpci(d) && vpci_process_pending(v) )
> -    {
> -        raise_softirq(SCHEDULE_SOFTIRQ);
> -        return false;
> -    }
> -
>     while ( (sv = get_pending_vcpu(v, &s)) != NULL )
>         if ( !wait_for_io(sv, get_ioreq(s, v)) )
>             return false;
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 


Reply via email to