Thread (36 messages) 36 messages, 4 authors, 2019-06-04

Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O and classic notifiers

From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Date: 2019-06-03 16:17:28
Also in: kvm, linux-s390

On Wed, 29 May 2019 14:26:56 +0200
Michael Mueller [off-list ref] wrote:
From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>

Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of
memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to
change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these
pieces of memory.

The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are
used, out of band with regards to ccw I/O. So these need to be allocated
as DMA memory (which is shared memory for protected virtualization
guests).

Let us factor out everything from struct virtio_ccw_device that needs to
be DMA memory in a satellite that is allocated as such.

Note: The control blocks of I/O instructions do not need to be shared.
These are marshalled by the ultravisor.

Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller <redacted>
---
 drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 177 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
(...)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -176,6 +180,22 @@ static struct virtio_ccw_device *to_vc_device(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 	return container_of(vdev, struct virtio_ccw_device, vdev);
 }
 
+static inline void *__vc_dma_alloc(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size)
+{
+	return ccw_device_dma_zalloc(to_vc_device(vdev)->cdev, size);
+}
+
+static inline void __vc_dma_free(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size,
+				 void *cpu_addr)
+{
+	return ccw_device_dma_free(to_vc_device(vdev)->cdev, cpu_addr, size);
+}
+
+#define vc_dma_alloc_struct(vdev, ptr) \
+	({ptr = __vc_dma_alloc(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr))); })
+#define vc_dma_free_struct(vdev, ptr) \
+	__vc_dma_free(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr)), (ptr))
+
I *still* don't like these #defines (and the __vc_dma_* functions), as I
already commented last time. I think they make it harder to follow the
code.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 static void drop_airq_indicator(struct virtqueue *vq, struct airq_info *info)
 {
 	unsigned long i, flags;
@@ -336,8 +356,7 @@ static void virtio_ccw_drop_indicator(struct virtio_ccw_device *vcdev,
 	struct airq_info *airq_info = vcdev->airq_info;
 
 	if (vcdev->is_thinint) {
-		thinint_area = kzalloc(sizeof(*thinint_area),
-				       GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
+		vc_dma_alloc_struct(&vcdev->vdev, thinint_area);
Last time I wrote:

"Any reason why this takes a detour via the virtio device? The ccw
 device is already referenced in vcdev, isn't it?

thinint_area = ccw_device_dma_zalloc(vcdev->cdev, sizeof(*thinint_area));

 looks much more obvious to me."

It still seems more obvious to me.
 		if (!thinint_area)
 			return;
 		thinint_area->summary_indicator =
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help