Patchwork [1/3] msi/msix: added functions to API to set up message address and data

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Alexey Kardashevskiy
Date June 14, 2012, 4:31 a.m.
Message ID <4FD9693E.2090508@ozlabs.ru>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/164795/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Alexey Kardashevskiy - June 14, 2012, 4:31 a.m.
Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.

On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.

The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.

Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
---
 hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
 hw/msi.h  |    1 +
 hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
 hw/msix.h |    3 +++
 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Alex Williamson - June 14, 2012, 4:56 a.m.
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 14:31 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
> However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
> does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.
> 
> On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
> signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
> to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.
> 
> The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
> another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
> where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
> ---
>  hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
>  hw/msi.h  |    1 +
>  hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
>  hw/msix.h |    3 +++
>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
> index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
> --- a/hw/msi.c
> +++ b/hw/msi.c
> @@ -358,3 +358,17 @@ unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
>      uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>      return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
>  }
> +
> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
> +{
> +    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
> +    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
> +
> +    if (msi64bit) {
> +        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
> +    } else {
> +        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
> +    }
> +    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
> +}

Why not make it msi_set_message() and pass MSIMessage?  I'd be great if
you tossed in a msi_get_message() as well, I think we need it to be able
to do a kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route() with MSI.  Thanks,

Alex

> +
> diff --git a/hw/msi.h b/hw/msi.h
> index 3040bb0..0acf434 100644
> --- a/hw/msi.h
> +++ b/hw/msi.h
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ void msi_reset(PCIDevice *dev);
>  void msi_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned int vector);
>  void msi_write_config(PCIDevice *dev, uint32_t addr, uint32_t val, int len);
>  unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev);
> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data);
> 
>  static inline bool msi_present(const PCIDevice *dev)
>  {
> diff --git a/hw/msix.c b/hw/msix.c
> index 3835eaa..c57c299 100644
> --- a/hw/msix.c
> +++ b/hw/msix.c
> @@ -414,3 +414,13 @@ void msix_unuse_all_vectors(PCIDevice *dev)
>          return;
>      msix_free_irq_entries(dev);
>  }
> +
> +void msix_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, int vector,
> +                           uint64_t address, uint32_t data)
> +{
> +    uint8_t *table_entry = dev->msix_table_page + vector * PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE;
> +    pci_set_quad(table_entry + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_LOWER_ADDR, address);
> +    pci_set_long(table_entry + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_DATA, data);
> +    table_entry[PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_VECTOR_CTRL] &= ~PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_CTRL_MASKBIT;
> +}
> +
> diff --git a/hw/msix.h b/hw/msix.h
> index 5aba22b..e6bb696 100644
> --- a/hw/msix.h
> +++ b/hw/msix.h
> @@ -29,4 +29,7 @@ void msix_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned vector);
> 
>  void msix_reset(PCIDevice *dev);
> 
> +void msix_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, int vector,
> +                           uint64_t address, uint32_t data);
> +
>  #endif
Alexey Kardashevskiy - June 14, 2012, 5:17 a.m.
On 14/06/12 14:56, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 14:31 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
>> However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
>> does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.
>>
>> On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
>> signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
>> to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.
>>
>> The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
>> another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
>> where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
>> ---
>>  hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
>>  hw/msi.h  |    1 +
>>  hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
>>  hw/msix.h |    3 +++
>>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
>> index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
>> --- a/hw/msi.c
>> +++ b/hw/msi.c
>> @@ -358,3 +358,17 @@ unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
>>      uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>>      return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
>>  }
>> +
>> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
>> +{
>> +    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>> +    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
>> +
>> +    if (msi64bit) {
>> +        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
>> +    } else {
>> +        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
>> +    }
>> +    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
>> +}
> 
> Why not make it msi_set_message() and pass MSIMessage?  I'd be great if
> you tossed in a msi_get_message() as well, I think we need it to be able
> to do a kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route() with MSI.  Thanks,


I am missing the point. What is that MSIMessage?
It is just an address and data, making a struct from this is a bit too much :)
I am totally unfamiliar with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route to see the bigger picture, sorry.


> Alex
> 
>> +
>> diff --git a/hw/msi.h b/hw/msi.h
>> index 3040bb0..0acf434 100644
>> --- a/hw/msi.h
>> +++ b/hw/msi.h
>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ void msi_reset(PCIDevice *dev);
>>  void msi_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned int vector);
>>  void msi_write_config(PCIDevice *dev, uint32_t addr, uint32_t val, int len);
>>  unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev);
>> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data);
>>
>>  static inline bool msi_present(const PCIDevice *dev)
>>  {
>> diff --git a/hw/msix.c b/hw/msix.c
>> index 3835eaa..c57c299 100644
>> --- a/hw/msix.c
>> +++ b/hw/msix.c
>> @@ -414,3 +414,13 @@ void msix_unuse_all_vectors(PCIDevice *dev)
>>          return;
>>      msix_free_irq_entries(dev);
>>  }
>> +
>> +void msix_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, int vector,
>> +                           uint64_t address, uint32_t data)
>> +{
>> +    uint8_t *table_entry = dev->msix_table_page + vector * PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE;
>> +    pci_set_quad(table_entry + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_LOWER_ADDR, address);
>> +    pci_set_long(table_entry + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_DATA, data);
>> +    table_entry[PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_VECTOR_CTRL] &= ~PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_CTRL_MASKBIT;
>> +}
>> +
>> diff --git a/hw/msix.h b/hw/msix.h
>> index 5aba22b..e6bb696 100644
>> --- a/hw/msix.h
>> +++ b/hw/msix.h
>> @@ -29,4 +29,7 @@ void msix_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned vector);
>>
>>  void msix_reset(PCIDevice *dev);
>>
>> +void msix_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, int vector,
>> +                           uint64_t address, uint32_t data);
>> +
>>  #endif
> 
> 
>
Alex Williamson - June 14, 2012, 5:38 a.m.
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 15:17 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 14/06/12 14:56, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 14:31 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >> Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
> >> However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
> >> does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.
> >>
> >> On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
> >> signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
> >> to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.
> >>
> >> The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
> >> another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
> >> where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
> >> ---
> >>  hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
> >>  hw/msi.h  |    1 +
> >>  hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
> >>  hw/msix.h |    3 +++
> >>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
> >> index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
> >> --- a/hw/msi.c
> >> +++ b/hw/msi.c
> >> @@ -358,3 +358,17 @@ unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
> >>      uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
> >>      return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
> >>  }
> >> +
> >> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
> >> +{
> >> +    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
> >> +    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
> >> +
> >> +    if (msi64bit) {
> >> +        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
> >> +    } else {
> >> +        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
> >> +    }
> >> +    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
> >> +}
> > 
> > Why not make it msi_set_message() and pass MSIMessage?  I'd be great if
> > you tossed in a msi_get_message() as well, I think we need it to be able
> > to do a kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route() with MSI.  Thanks,
> 
> 
> I am missing the point. What is that MSIMessage?
> It is just an address and data, making a struct from this is a bit too much :)
> I am totally unfamiliar with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route to see the bigger picture, sorry.

MSIVectorUseNotifier passes a MSIMessage back to the device when a
vector is unmasked.  We can then add a route in KVM for that message
with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route.  Finally, kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd allows
us to connect that MSI route to an eventfd, such as from virtio or vfio.
Then MSI eventfds can bypass qemu and be injected directly into KVM and
on into the guest.  So we seem to already have some standardization on
passing address/data via an MSIMessage.

You need a "set" interface, I need a "get" interface.  msix already has
a static msix_get_message().  So I'd suggest that an exported
get/set_message for each seems like the right way to go.  Thanks,

Alex
Alexey Kardashevskiy - June 14, 2012, 5:44 a.m.
On 14/06/12 15:38, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 15:17 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 14/06/12 14:56, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 14:31 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>> Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
>>>> However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
>>>> does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
>>>> signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
>>>> to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.
>>>>
>>>> The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
>>>> another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
>>>> where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
>>>> ---
>>>>  hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
>>>>  hw/msi.h  |    1 +
>>>>  hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
>>>>  hw/msix.h |    3 +++
>>>>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
>>>> index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/msi.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/msi.c
>>>> @@ -358,3 +358,17 @@ unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
>>>>      uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>>>>      return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
>>>>  }
>>>> +
>>>> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>>>> +    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
>>>> +
>>>> +    if (msi64bit) {
>>>> +        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
>>>> +    } else {
>>>> +        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Why not make it msi_set_message() and pass MSIMessage?  I'd be great if
>>> you tossed in a msi_get_message() as well, I think we need it to be able
>>> to do a kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route() with MSI.  Thanks,
>>
>>
>> I am missing the point. What is that MSIMessage?
>> It is just an address and data, making a struct from this is a bit too much :)
>> I am totally unfamiliar with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route to see the bigger picture, sorry.
> 
> MSIVectorUseNotifier passes a MSIMessage back to the device when a
> vector is unmasked.  We can then add a route in KVM for that message
> with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route.  Finally, kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd allows
> us to connect that MSI route to an eventfd, such as from virtio or vfio.
> Then MSI eventfds can bypass qemu and be injected directly into KVM and
> on into the guest.  So we seem to already have some standardization on
> passing address/data via an MSIMessage.
> 
> You need a "set" interface, I need a "get" interface.  msix already has
> a static msix_get_message().  So I'd suggest that an exported
> get/set_message for each seems like the right way to go.  Thanks,

Ok. Slowly :) What QEMU tree are you talking about? git, branch?
There is neither MSIVectorUseNotifier nor MSIMessage in your or mine trees.
Jan Kiszka - June 14, 2012, 5:45 a.m.
On 2012-06-14 07:17, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 14/06/12 14:56, Alex Williamson wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 14:31 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
>>> However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
>>> does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
>>> signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
>>> to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.
>>>
>>> The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
>>> another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
>>> where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
>>> ---
>>>  hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
>>>  hw/msi.h  |    1 +
>>>  hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
>>>  hw/msix.h |    3 +++
>>>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
>>> index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
>>> --- a/hw/msi.c
>>> +++ b/hw/msi.c
>>> @@ -358,3 +358,17 @@ unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
>>>      uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>>>      return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
>>>  }
>>> +
>>> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
>>> +{
>>> +    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
>>> +    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
>>> +
>>> +    if (msi64bit) {
>>> +        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
>>> +    }
>>> +    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
>>> +}
>>
>> Why not make it msi_set_message() and pass MSIMessage?  I'd be great if
>> you tossed in a msi_get_message() as well, I think we need it to be able
>> to do a kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route() with MSI.  Thanks,
> 
> 
> I am missing the point. What is that MSIMessage?
> It is just an address and data, making a struct from this is a bit too much :)

This is about consistent APIs. In practice (assembly), MSIMessage will
make no difference from open-coded address/data tuples, but it is
cleaner to pass around. Please follow the existing patterns.

> I am totally unfamiliar with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route to see the bigger picture, sorry.

The kvm_irqchip_* API come into play when you implement some interrupt
controller models in the kernel for performance reasons. We have this on
x86, we will see it on Book3E and ARM soon. You are targeting Book3S,
right? Not sure what the plans are there.

And, yes, msi_get_message() will be needed soon as well, at latest when
I push vector notifiers for classic MSI. If you have a need for reading
the message back, please add this helper already.

Jan
Alex Williamson - June 14, 2012, 6:37 p.m.
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 15:44 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 14/06/12 15:38, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 15:17 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >> On 14/06/12 14:56, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 14:31 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >>>> Normally QEMU expects the guest to initialize MSI/MSIX vectors.
> >>>> However on POWER the guest uses RTAS subsystem to configure MSI/MSIX and
> >>>> does not write these vectors to device's config space or MSIX BAR.
> >>>>
> >>>> On the other hand, msi_notify()/msix_notify() write to these vectors to
> >>>> signal the guest about an interrupt so we have to write correct vectors
> >>>> to the devices in order not to change every user of MSI/MSIX.
> >>>>
> >>>> The first aim is to support MSIX for virtio-pci on POWER. There is
> >>>> another patch for POWER coming which introduces a special memory region
> >>>> where MSI/MSIX vectors point to.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  hw/msi.c  |   14 ++++++++++++++
> >>>>  hw/msi.h  |    1 +
> >>>>  hw/msix.c |   10 ++++++++++
> >>>>  hw/msix.h |    3 +++
> >>>>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
> >>>> index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
> >>>> --- a/hw/msi.c
> >>>> +++ b/hw/msi.c
> >>>> @@ -358,3 +358,17 @@ unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
> >>>>      uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
> >>>>      return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
> >>>>  }
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
> >>>> +    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +    if (msi64bit) {
> >>>> +        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
> >>>> +    } else {
> >>>> +        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
> >>>> +    }
> >>>> +    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
> >>>> +}
> >>>
> >>> Why not make it msi_set_message() and pass MSIMessage?  I'd be great if
> >>> you tossed in a msi_get_message() as well, I think we need it to be able
> >>> to do a kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route() with MSI.  Thanks,
> >>
> >>
> >> I am missing the point. What is that MSIMessage?
> >> It is just an address and data, making a struct from this is a bit too much :)
> >> I am totally unfamiliar with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route to see the bigger picture, sorry.
> > 
> > MSIVectorUseNotifier passes a MSIMessage back to the device when a
> > vector is unmasked.  We can then add a route in KVM for that message
> > with kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route.  Finally, kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd allows
> > us to connect that MSI route to an eventfd, such as from virtio or vfio.
> > Then MSI eventfds can bypass qemu and be injected directly into KVM and
> > on into the guest.  So we seem to already have some standardization on
> > passing address/data via an MSIMessage.
> > 
> > You need a "set" interface, I need a "get" interface.  msix already has
> > a static msix_get_message().  So I'd suggest that an exported
> > get/set_message for each seems like the right way to go.  Thanks,
> 
> Ok. Slowly :) What QEMU tree are you talking about? git, branch?
> There is neither MSIVectorUseNotifier nor MSIMessage in your or mine trees.

http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;f=hw/msi.h;hb=HEAD
http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob;f=hw/pci.h;hb=HEAD

Very recent changesets by Jan, see 14de9bab & 2cdfe53c.  If I can get my
msix changes in, I'll push an updated tree for vfio that makes use of
these.  Thanks,

Alex

Patch

diff --git a/hw/msi.c b/hw/msi.c
index 5d6ceb6..124878a 100644
--- a/hw/msi.c
+++ b/hw/msi.c
@@ -358,3 +358,17 @@  unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev)
     uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
     return msi_nr_vectors(flags);
 }
+
+void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data)
+{
+    uint16_t flags = pci_get_word(dev->config + msi_flags_off(dev));
+    bool msi64bit = flags & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
+
+    if (msi64bit) {
+        pci_set_quad(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
+    } else {
+        pci_set_long(dev->config + msi_address_lo_off(dev), address);
+    }
+    pci_set_word(dev->config + msi_data_off(dev, msi64bit), data);
+}
+
diff --git a/hw/msi.h b/hw/msi.h
index 3040bb0..0acf434 100644
--- a/hw/msi.h
+++ b/hw/msi.h
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@  void msi_reset(PCIDevice *dev);
 void msi_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned int vector);
 void msi_write_config(PCIDevice *dev, uint32_t addr, uint32_t val, int len);
 unsigned int msi_nr_vectors_allocated(const PCIDevice *dev);
+void msi_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, uint64_t address, uint16_t data);

 static inline bool msi_present(const PCIDevice *dev)
 {
diff --git a/hw/msix.c b/hw/msix.c
index 3835eaa..c57c299 100644
--- a/hw/msix.c
+++ b/hw/msix.c
@@ -414,3 +414,13 @@  void msix_unuse_all_vectors(PCIDevice *dev)
         return;
     msix_free_irq_entries(dev);
 }
+
+void msix_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, int vector,
+                           uint64_t address, uint32_t data)
+{
+    uint8_t *table_entry = dev->msix_table_page + vector * PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE;
+    pci_set_quad(table_entry + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_LOWER_ADDR, address);
+    pci_set_long(table_entry + PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_DATA, data);
+    table_entry[PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_VECTOR_CTRL] &= ~PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_CTRL_MASKBIT;
+}
+
diff --git a/hw/msix.h b/hw/msix.h
index 5aba22b..e6bb696 100644
--- a/hw/msix.h
+++ b/hw/msix.h
@@ -29,4 +29,7 @@  void msix_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned vector);

 void msix_reset(PCIDevice *dev);

+void msix_set_address_data(PCIDevice *dev, int vector,
+                           uint64_t address, uint32_t data);
+
 #endif