| Message ID | 1385620533-17685-3-git-send-email-Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback > Without this patch we gets below warning > > " > PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > " > > Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > --- > hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > index 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > uint32_t gasket_time; > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > uint32_t first_slot; > /* mmio maps */ > MemoryRegion container; > @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice *pci_dev, int pin) > > static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) > { > - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; Double semicolon? > > pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); > > qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); > } > > +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int pin) > +{ > + PCIINTxRoute route; > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > + > + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > + > + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, route.irq); > + return route; > +} > + > static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > .name = "pci_outbound", > .version_id = 0, > @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? I don't understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. Michael, could you please shed some light on this? Alex > } > > memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); > > b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, > - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, address_space_mem, > + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, address_space_mem, > &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), 4, TYPE_PCI_BUS); > h->bus = b; > > @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s->iomem); > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); > + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); > > return 0; > } > -- > 1.7.0.4 > >
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > > > This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback > > Without this patch we gets below warning > > > > " > > PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > " > > > > Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > > --- > > hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > index 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > > --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > > struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > > uint32_t gasket_time; > > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > uint32_t first_slot; > > /* mmio maps */ > > MemoryRegion container; > > @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice *pci_dev, int pin) > > > > static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) > > { > > - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > Double semicolon? > > > > > pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); > > > > qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); > > } > > > > +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int pin) > > +{ > > + PCIINTxRoute route; > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > + > > + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > > + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > > + > > + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, route.irq); > > + return route; > > +} > > + > > static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > > .name = "pci_outbound", > > .version_id = 0, > > @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > > sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > > + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > > Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? I don't understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > > Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > > > Alex This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by device assignment and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device drive. > > } > > > > memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); > > > > b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, > > - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, address_space_mem, > > + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, address_space_mem, > > &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), 4, TYPE_PCI_BUS); > > h->bus = b; > > > > @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s->iomem); > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); > > + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); > > > > return 0; > > } > > -- > > 1.7.0.4 > > > >
> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM > To: Alexander Graf > Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc; Bhushan > Bharat-R65777 > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > > > > > This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this > > > patch we gets below warning > > > > > > " > > > PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > > qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing > > > (e500-pcihost) " > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > > > --- > > > hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index > > > 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > > > --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > > > struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > > > uint32_t gasket_time; > > > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > uint32_t first_slot; > > > /* mmio maps */ > > > MemoryRegion container; > > > @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice > > > *pci_dev, int pin) > > > > > > static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { > > > - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > > > Double semicolon? Ok, will correct. > > > > > > > > pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); > > > > > > qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); > > > } > > > > > > +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int > > > +pin) { > > > + PCIINTxRoute route; > > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > + > > > + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > > > + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > > > + > > > + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, > route.irq); > > > + return route; > > > +} > > > + > > > static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > > > .name = "pci_outbound", > > > .version_id = 0, > > > @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice > > > *dev) > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > > > sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > > > + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > > > > Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? I don't > understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > > > > Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > > > > > > Alex > > This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by device assignment > and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device drive. Yes, exactly same reason. Thanks -Bharat > > > > } > > > > > > memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", > > > PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); > > > > > > b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, > > > - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, address_space_mem, > > > + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, address_space_mem, > > > &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), 4, > TYPE_PCI_BUS); > > > h->bus = b; > > > > > > @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > > memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s->iomem); > > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); > > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); > > > + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); > > > > > > return 0; > > > } > > > -- > > > 1.7.0.4 > > > > > > >
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 03:39:58PM +0000, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM > > To: Alexander Graf > > Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc; Bhushan > > Bharat-R65777 > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > > > On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > > > > > > > This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this > > > > patch we gets below warning > > > > > > > > " > > > > PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > > > qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing > > > > (e500-pcihost) " > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > > > > --- > > > > hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index > > > > 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > > > > --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > > +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > > > > struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > > > > uint32_t gasket_time; > > > > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > > + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > > uint32_t first_slot; > > > > /* mmio maps */ > > > > MemoryRegion container; > > > > @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice > > > > *pci_dev, int pin) > > > > > > > > static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { > > > > - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > > > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > > + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > > > > > Double semicolon? > > Ok, will correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); > > > > > > > > qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); > > > > } > > > > > > > > +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int > > > > +pin) { > > > > + PCIINTxRoute route; > > > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > > + > > > > + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > > > > + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > > > > + > > > > + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, > > route.irq); > > > > + return route; > > > > +} > > > > + > > > > static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > > > > .name = "pci_outbound", > > > > .version_id = 0, > > > > @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice > > > > *dev) > > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > > > > sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > > > > + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > > > > > > Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? I don't > > understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > > > > > > Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by device assignment > > and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device drive. > > Yes, exactly same reason. > > Thanks > -Bharat you probably should say in commit log "this makes vfio work on ppc" - assumng it works for you of course. as it is it makes it look like you are just trying to shut off a warning. > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", > > > > PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); > > > > > > > > b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, > > > > - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, address_space_mem, > > > > + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, address_space_mem, > > > > &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), 4, > > TYPE_PCI_BUS); > > > > h->bus = b; > > > > > > > > @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > > > memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s->iomem); > > > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); > > > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); > > > > + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); > > > > > > > > return 0; > > > > } > > > > -- > > > > 1.7.0.4 > > > > > > > > > >
> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 9:20 PM > To: Bhushan Bharat-R65777 > Cc: Alexander Graf; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 03:39:58PM +0000, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM > > > To: Alexander Graf > > > Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; > > > qemu-ppc; Bhushan > > > Bharat-R65777 > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > > > > > On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this > > > > > patch we gets below warning > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > > > > qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing > > > > > (e500-pcihost) " > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index > > > > > 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > > > > > --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > > > +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > > > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > > > > > struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > > > > > uint32_t gasket_time; > > > > > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > > > + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > > > uint32_t first_slot; > > > > > /* mmio maps */ > > > > > MemoryRegion container; > > > > > @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice > > > > > *pci_dev, int pin) > > > > > > > > > > static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { > > > > > - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > > > > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > > > + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > > > > > > > Double semicolon? > > > > Ok, will correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , > > > > > level); > > > > > > > > > > qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); } > > > > > > > > > > +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, > > > > > +int > > > > > +pin) { > > > > > + PCIINTxRoute route; > > > > > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > > > + > > > > > + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > > > > > + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > > > > > + > > > > > + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, > > > > > + pin, > > > route.irq); > > > > > + return route; > > > > > +} > > > > > + > > > > > static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > > > > > .name = "pci_outbound", > > > > > .version_id = 0, > > > > > @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int > > > > > e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice > > > > > *dev) > > > > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > > > > > sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > > > > > + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > > > > > > > > Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? > > > > I don't > > > understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > > > > > > > > Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by > > > device assignment and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device > drive. > > > > Yes, exactly same reason. > > > > Thanks > > -Bharat > > > you probably should say in commit log > "this makes vfio work on ppc" - assumng it works for you of course. Yes :) > as it is it makes it look like you are just trying to shut off a warning. Ok I will update the log. vfio on powerpc is not yet upstream so I restrained myself from writing that. Thanks -Bharat > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", > > > > > PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); > > > > > > > > > > b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, > > > > > - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, > address_space_mem, > > > > > + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, > > > > > + address_space_mem, > > > > > &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), > > > > > 4, > > > TYPE_PCI_BUS); > > > > > h->bus = b; > > > > > > > > > > @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > > > > memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s- > >iomem); > > > > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); > > > > > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); > > > > > + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); > > > > > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > } > > > > > -- > > > > > 1.7.0.4 > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
On 19.12.2013, at 16:39, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM >> To: Alexander Graf >> Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc; Bhushan >> Bharat-R65777 >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing >> >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> >>> On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: >>> >>>> This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this >>>> patch we gets below warning >>>> >>>> " >>>> PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) >>>> qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing >>>> (e500-pcihost) " >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> >>>> --- >>>> hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- >>>> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index >>>> 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c >>>> +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c >>>> @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { >>>> struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; >>>> uint32_t gasket_time; >>>> qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; >>>> + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; >>>> uint32_t first_slot; >>>> /* mmio maps */ >>>> MemoryRegion container; >>>> @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice >>>> *pci_dev, int pin) >>>> >>>> static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { >>>> - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; >>>> + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; >>> >>> Double semicolon? > > Ok, will correct. > >>> >>>> >>>> pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); >>>> >>>> qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int >>>> +pin) { >>>> + PCIINTxRoute route; >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; >>>> + >>>> + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; >>>> + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; >>>> + >>>> + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, >> route.irq); >>>> + return route; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { >>>> .name = "pci_outbound", >>>> .version_id = 0, >>>> @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice >>>> *dev) >>>> >>>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { >>>> sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); >>>> + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; >>> >>> Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? I don't >> understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. >>> >>> Michael, could you please shed some light on this? >>> >>> >>> Alex >> >> This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by device assignment >> and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device drive. > > Yes, exactly same reason. Is there any way we could get rid of the information duplication? The fact that INTA/B/C/D are mapped to 1,2,3,4 is really a configuration parameter that should only live at a single spot. Alex
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 05:28:17PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 19.12.2013, at 16:39, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM > >> To: Alexander Graf > >> Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc; Bhushan > >> Bharat-R65777 > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > >>> > >>> On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this > >>>> patch we gets below warning > >>>> > >>>> " > >>>> PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > >>>> qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing > >>>> (e500-pcihost) " > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > >>>> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index > >>>> 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > >>>> --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > >>>> +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > >>>> @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > >>>> struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > >>>> uint32_t gasket_time; > >>>> qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > >>>> + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > >>>> uint32_t first_slot; > >>>> /* mmio maps */ > >>>> MemoryRegion container; > >>>> @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice > >>>> *pci_dev, int pin) > >>>> > >>>> static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { > >>>> - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > >>>> + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > >>> > >>> Double semicolon? > > > > Ok, will correct. > > > >>> > >>>> > >>>> pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); > >>>> > >>>> qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int > >>>> +pin) { > >>>> + PCIINTxRoute route; > >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > >>>> + > >>>> + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > >>>> + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > >>>> + > >>>> + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, > >> route.irq); > >>>> + return route; > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > >>>> .name = "pci_outbound", > >>>> .version_id = 0, > >>>> @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice > >>>> *dev) > >>>> > >>>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > >>>> sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > >>>> + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > >>> > >>> Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? I don't > >> understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > >>> > >>> Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > >>> > >>> > >>> Alex > >> > >> This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by device assignment > >> and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device drive. > > > > Yes, exactly same reason. > > Is there any way we could get rid of the information duplication? The fact that INTA/B/C/D are mapped to 1,2,3,4 is really a configuration parameter that should only live at a single spot. > > > Alex Yes. In fact I had the idea to only have something like pci_device_route_intx_to_irq and call it once for all interrupts and cache that, then use this to send interrupts directly to apic. Redo this each time routing changes. I had a patch like this (and I think Jan had one too), but Anthony said he'll rewrite all interrupt routing using QOM so I dropped it. I'll try to resurrect it.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 12:02 AM > To: Alexander Graf > Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 05:28:17PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > On 19.12.2013, at 16:39, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > > >> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM > > >> To: Alexander Graf > > >> Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; > > >> qemu-ppc; Bhushan > > >> Bharat-R65777 > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > >>> > > >>> On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this > > >>>> patch we gets below warning > > >>>> > > >>>> " > > >>>> PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > >>>> qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing > > >>>> (e500-pcihost) " > > >>>> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > > >>>> --- > > >>>> hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > >>>> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > >>>> > > >>>> diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index > > >>>> 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > > >>>> --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > >>>> +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > >>>> @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > > >>>> struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > > >>>> uint32_t gasket_time; > > >>>> qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > >>>> + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > >>>> uint32_t first_slot; > > >>>> /* mmio maps */ > > >>>> MemoryRegion container; > > >>>> @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice > > >>>> *pci_dev, int pin) > > >>>> > > >>>> static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { > > >>>> - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > > >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > >>>> + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > >>> > > >>> Double semicolon? > > > > > > Ok, will correct. > > > > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , > > >>>> level); > > >>>> > > >>>> qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); } > > >>>> > > >>>> +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int > > >>>> +pin) { > > >>>> + PCIINTxRoute route; > > >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > >>>> + > > >>>> + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > > >>>> + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > > >>>> + > > >>>> + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, > > >>>> + pin, > > >> route.irq); > > >>>> + return route; > > >>>> +} > > >>>> + > > >>>> static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > > >>>> .name = "pci_outbound", > > >>>> .version_id = 0, > > >>>> @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice > > >>>> *dev) > > >>>> > > >>>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > > >>>> sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > > >>>> + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > > >>> > > >>> Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? > > >>> I don't > > >> understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > > >>> > > >>> Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Alex > > >> > > >> This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by > > >> device assignment and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device > drive. > > > > > > Yes, exactly same reason. > > > > Is there any way we could get rid of the information duplication? The fact > that INTA/B/C/D are mapped to 1,2,3,4 is really a configuration parameter that > should only live at a single spot. > > > > > > Alex > > Yes. In fact I had the idea to only have something like > pci_device_route_intx_to_irq and call it once for all interrupts and cache that, > then use this to send interrupts directly to apic. > Redo this each time routing changes. > I had a patch like this (and I think Jan had one too), but Anthony said he'll > rewrite all interrupt routing using QOM so I dropped it. I'll try to resurrect > it. So do we want to have this patch almost in this shape and hope Anthony's changes will handle this well or wait for Anthony patches first ? Thanks -Bharat >
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 04:15:09AM +0000, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > > Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 12:02 AM > > To: Alexander Graf > > Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; qemu-ppc > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 05:28:17PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > > > On 19.12.2013, at 16:39, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com] > > > >> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 3:55 AM > > > >> To: Alexander Graf > > > >> Cc: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Wood Scott-B07421; QEMU Developers; > > > >> qemu-ppc; Bhushan > > > >> Bharat-R65777 > > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc-e500: implement PCI INTx routing > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:53:32PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> On 28.11.2013, at 07:35, Bharat Bhushan <r65777@freescale.com> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this > > > >>>> patch we gets below warning > > > >>>> > > > >>>> " > > > >>>> PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > > > >>>> qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing > > > >>>> (e500-pcihost) " > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > > >>>> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index > > > >>>> 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > > > >>>> --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > >>>> +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > > > >>>> @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > > > >>>> struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > > > >>>> uint32_t gasket_time; > > > >>>> qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > >>>> + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > > > >>>> uint32_t first_slot; > > > >>>> /* mmio maps */ > > > >>>> MemoryRegion container; > > > >>>> @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice > > > >>>> *pci_dev, int pin) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { > > > >>>> - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > > > >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > >>>> + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > > >>> > > > >>> Double semicolon? > > > > > > > > Ok, will correct. > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , > > > >>>> level); > > > >>>> > > > >>>> qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); } > > > >>>> > > > >>>> +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int > > > >>>> +pin) { > > > >>>> + PCIINTxRoute route; > > > >>>> + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > > > >>>> + > > > >>>> + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > > > >>>> + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > > > >>>> + > > > >>>> + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, > > > >>>> + pin, > > > >> route.irq); > > > >>>> + return route; > > > >>>> +} > > > >>>> + > > > >>>> static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > > > >>>> .name = "pci_outbound", > > > >>>> .version_id = 0, > > > >>>> @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice > > > >>>> *dev) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > > > >>>> sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > > > >>>> + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > > > >>> > > > >>> Doesn't this duplicate the logic from ppce500_pci_map_irq_slot()? > > > >>> I don't > > > >> understand the purpose of this whole exercise to be honest. > > > >>> > > > >>> Michael, could you please shed some light on this? > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Alex > > > >> > > > >> This is printed by pci_device_route_intx_to_irq - it's used by > > > >> device assignment and vfio to figure out which irq does a given pci device > > drive. > > > > > > > > Yes, exactly same reason. > > > > > > Is there any way we could get rid of the information duplication? The fact > > that INTA/B/C/D are mapped to 1,2,3,4 is really a configuration parameter that > > should only live at a single spot. > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > Yes. In fact I had the idea to only have something like > > pci_device_route_intx_to_irq and call it once for all interrupts and cache that, > > then use this to send interrupts directly to apic. > > Redo this each time routing changes. > > I had a patch like this (and I think Jan had one too), but Anthony said he'll > > rewrite all interrupt routing using QOM so I dropped it. I'll try to resurrect > > it. > > So do we want to have this patch almost in this shape and hope Anthony's changes will handle this well or wait for Anthony patches first ? > > Thanks > -Bharat I think your patch is the right thing to do ATM. > >
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 12:05:33PM +0530, Bharat Bhushan wrote: > This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback > Without this patch we gets below warning > > " > PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) > " > > Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> Please tweak commit log to explain thereal motivation for the change which is to use vfio on ppc. Besides that Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > --- > hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > index 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 > --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { > struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; > uint32_t gasket_time; > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > uint32_t first_slot; > /* mmio maps */ > MemoryRegion container; > @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice *pci_dev, int pin) > > static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) > { > - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; > > pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); > > qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); > } > > +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int pin) > +{ > + PCIINTxRoute route; > + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; > + > + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; > + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; > + > + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, route.irq); > + return route; > +} > + > static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { > .name = "pci_outbound", > .version_id = 0, > @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { > sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); > + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; > } > > memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); > > b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, > - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, address_space_mem, > + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, address_space_mem, > &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), 4, TYPE_PCI_BUS); > h->bus = b; > > @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) > memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s->iomem); > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); > sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); > + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); > > return 0; > } > -- > 1.7.0.4 > >
diff --git a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c index 49bfcc6..3c4cf9e 100644 --- a/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c +++ b/hw/pci-host/ppce500.c @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct PPCE500PCIState { struct pci_inbound pib[PPCE500_PCI_NR_PIBS]; uint32_t gasket_time; qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; + uint32_t irq_num[PCI_NUM_PINS]; uint32_t first_slot; /* mmio maps */ MemoryRegion container; @@ -267,13 +268,26 @@ static int mpc85xx_pci_map_irq(PCIDevice *pci_dev, int pin) static void mpc85xx_pci_set_irq(void *opaque, int pin, int level) { - qemu_irq *pic = opaque; + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; + qemu_irq *pic = s->irq;; pci_debug("%s: PCI irq %d, level:%d\n", __func__, pin , level); qemu_set_irq(pic[pin], level); } +static PCIINTxRoute e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq(void *opaque, int pin) +{ + PCIINTxRoute route; + PPCE500PCIState *s = opaque; + + route.mode = PCI_INTX_ENABLED; + route.irq = s->irq_num[pin]; + + pci_debug("%s: PCI irq-pin = %d, irq_num= %d\n", __func__, pin, route.irq); + return route; +} + static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pci_outbound = { .name = "pci_outbound", .version_id = 0, @@ -350,12 +364,13 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->irq); i++) { sysbus_init_irq(dev, &s->irq[i]); + s->irq_num[i] = i + 1; } memory_region_init(&s->pio, OBJECT(s), "pci-pio", PCIE500_PCI_IOLEN); b = pci_register_bus(DEVICE(dev), NULL, mpc85xx_pci_set_irq, - mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s->irq, address_space_mem, + mpc85xx_pci_map_irq, s, address_space_mem, &s->pio, PCI_DEVFN(s->first_slot, 0), 4, TYPE_PCI_BUS); h->bus = b; @@ -373,6 +388,7 @@ static int e500_pcihost_initfn(SysBusDevice *dev) memory_region_add_subregion(&s->container, PCIE500_REG_BASE, &s->iomem); sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->container); sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &s->pio); + pci_bus_set_route_irq_fn(b, e500_route_intx_pin_to_irq); return 0; }
This patch adds pci pin to irq_num routing callback Without this patch we gets below warning " PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) qemu-system-ppc64: PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (e500-pcihost) " Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com> --- hw/pci-host/ppce500.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)