On 17/07/2020 08:41, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
We need to come up with something similar for dom0less too. It could be
exactly the same thing (a list of BDFs as strings as a device tree
property) or something else if we can come up with a better idea.
Fully agree.
Maybe a tree topology could allow more possibilities (like giving BAR values)
in the future.
# Emulated PCI device tree node in libxl:
Libxl is creating a virtual PCI device tree node in the device tree to enable the guest
OS to discover the virtual PCI during guest boot. We introduced the new config option
[vpci="pci_ecam"] for guests. When this config option is enabled in a guest
configuration, a PCI device tree node will be created in the guest device tree.
A new area has been reserved in the arm guest physical map at which the VPCI
bus is declared in the device tree (reg and ranges parameters of the node). A
trap handler for the PCI ECAM access from guest has been registered at the
defined address and redirects requests to the VPCI driver in Xen.
Limitation:
* Only one PCI device tree node is supported as of now.
I think vpci="pci_ecam" should be optional: if pci=[ "PCI_SPEC_STRING",
...] is specififed, then vpci="pci_ecam" is implied.
vpci="pci_ecam" is only useful one day in the future when we want to be
able to emulate other non-ecam host bridges. For now we could even skip
it.
This would create a problem if xl is used to add a PCI device as we need the
PCI node to be in the DTB when the guest is created.
I agree this is not needed but removing it might create more complexity in the
code.
I would suggest we have it from day 0 as there are plenty of HW available which
is not ECAM.
Having vpci allows other bridges to be supported
So I can understand why you would want to have a driver for non-ECAM
host PCI controller. However, why would you want to emulate a non-ECAM
PCI controller to a guest?
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
