| Message ID | 1484633936-25344-5-git-send-email-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
forget to cc maintainers in this new patch On 01/17/2017 02:18 PM, Cao jin wrote: > Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. > > Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > hw/net/e1000e.c | 4 ++++ > hw/net/rocker/rocker.c | 5 +++++ > hw/net/vmxnet3.c | 6 +++++- > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 13 +++++++------ > 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/net/e1000e.c b/hw/net/e1000e.c > index ed04adce061c..74cbbef30366 100644 > --- a/hw/net/e1000e.c > +++ b/hw/net/e1000e.c > @@ -294,6 +294,10 @@ e1000e_init_msix(E1000EState *s) > E1000E_MSIX_IDX, E1000E_MSIX_PBA, > 0xA0, NULL); > > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > + * is a programming error. Fall back to INTx silently on -ENOTSUP */ > + assert(!res || res == -ENOTSUP); > + > if (res < 0) { > trace_e1000e_msix_init_fail(res); > } else { > diff --git a/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c b/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c > index 6e70fddee36b..e394fd61fe64 100644 > --- a/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c > +++ b/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c > @@ -1264,6 +1264,11 @@ static int rocker_msix_init(Rocker *r) > &r->msix_bar, > ROCKER_PCI_MSIX_BAR_IDX, ROCKER_PCI_MSIX_PBA_OFFSET, > 0, &local_err); > + > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > + * is a programming error. */ > + assert(!err || err == -ENOTSUP); > + > if (err) { > error_report_err(local_err); > return err; > diff --git a/hw/net/vmxnet3.c b/hw/net/vmxnet3.c > index 7b2971fe5902..a433cc017cb1 100644 > --- a/hw/net/vmxnet3.c > +++ b/hw/net/vmxnet3.c > @@ -2193,8 +2193,12 @@ vmxnet3_init_msix(VMXNET3State *s) > VMXNET3_MSIX_BAR_IDX, VMXNET3_OFF_MSIX_PBA(s), > VMXNET3_MSIX_OFFSET(s), NULL); > > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > + * is a programming error. Fall back to INTx on -ENOTSUP */ > + assert(!res || res == -ENOTSUP); > + > if (0 > res) { > - VMW_WRPRN("Failed to initialize MSI-X, error %d", res); > + VMW_WRPRN("Failed to initialize MSI-X, board's MSI support is broken"); > s->msix_used = false; > } else { > if (!vmxnet3_use_msix_vectors(s, VMXNET3_MAX_INTRS)) { > diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c > index 4c2c4941d245..2417c78c477e 100644 > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c > @@ -1670,13 +1670,14 @@ static void virtio_pci_device_plugged(DeviceState *d, Error **errp) > > if (proxy->nvectors) { > int err = msix_init_exclusive_bar(&proxy->pci_dev, proxy->nvectors, > - proxy->msix_bar_idx, NULL); > + proxy->msix_bar_idx, errp); > + > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > + * is a programming error. */ > + assert(!err || err == -ENOTSUP); > + > if (err) { > - /* Notice when a system that supports MSIx can't initialize it */ > - if (err != -ENOTSUP) { > - error_report("unable to init msix vectors to %" PRIu32, > - proxy->nvectors); > - } > + error_report_err(*errp); > proxy->nvectors = 0; > } > } >
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 02:50:38PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: > forget to cc maintainers in this new patch > > On 01/17/2017 02:18 PM, Cao jin wrote: > > Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> I don't like this one, frankly. That's a bunch of code duplication. I suspect vfio is the only one who might reasonably get EINVAL here. So how about e.g. msix_validate_and_init that doesn't assert and use that from vfio, then switch msix_init to assert instead? > > --- > > hw/net/e1000e.c | 4 ++++ > > hw/net/rocker/rocker.c | 5 +++++ > > hw/net/vmxnet3.c | 6 +++++- > > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 13 +++++++------ > > 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/hw/net/e1000e.c b/hw/net/e1000e.c > > index ed04adce061c..74cbbef30366 100644 > > --- a/hw/net/e1000e.c > > +++ b/hw/net/e1000e.c > > @@ -294,6 +294,10 @@ e1000e_init_msix(E1000EState *s) > > E1000E_MSIX_IDX, E1000E_MSIX_PBA, > > 0xA0, NULL); > > > > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > > + * is a programming error. Fall back to INTx silently on -ENOTSUP */ /* don't format * comments like this pls. */ /* * do it * like this pls */ > > + assert(!res || res == -ENOTSUP); > > + > > if (res < 0) { > > trace_e1000e_msix_init_fail(res); > > } else { > > diff --git a/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c b/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c > > index 6e70fddee36b..e394fd61fe64 100644 > > --- a/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c > > +++ b/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c > > @@ -1264,6 +1264,11 @@ static int rocker_msix_init(Rocker *r) > > &r->msix_bar, > > ROCKER_PCI_MSIX_BAR_IDX, ROCKER_PCI_MSIX_PBA_OFFSET, > > 0, &local_err); > > + > > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > > + * is a programming error. */ > > + assert(!err || err == -ENOTSUP); > > + > > if (err) { > > error_report_err(local_err); > > return err; > > diff --git a/hw/net/vmxnet3.c b/hw/net/vmxnet3.c > > index 7b2971fe5902..a433cc017cb1 100644 > > --- a/hw/net/vmxnet3.c > > +++ b/hw/net/vmxnet3.c > > @@ -2193,8 +2193,12 @@ vmxnet3_init_msix(VMXNET3State *s) > > VMXNET3_MSIX_BAR_IDX, VMXNET3_OFF_MSIX_PBA(s), > > VMXNET3_MSIX_OFFSET(s), NULL); > > > > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > > + * is a programming error. Fall back to INTx on -ENOTSUP */ > > + assert(!res || res == -ENOTSUP); > > + > > if (0 > res) { > > - VMW_WRPRN("Failed to initialize MSI-X, error %d", res); > > + VMW_WRPRN("Failed to initialize MSI-X, board's MSI support is broken"); > > s->msix_used = false; > > } else { > > if (!vmxnet3_use_msix_vectors(s, VMXNET3_MAX_INTRS)) { > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c > > index 4c2c4941d245..2417c78c477e 100644 > > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c > > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c > > @@ -1670,13 +1670,14 @@ static void virtio_pci_device_plugged(DeviceState *d, Error **errp) > > > > if (proxy->nvectors) { > > int err = msix_init_exclusive_bar(&proxy->pci_dev, proxy->nvectors, > > - proxy->msix_bar_idx, NULL); > > + proxy->msix_bar_idx, errp); > > + > > + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) > > + * is a programming error. */ > > + assert(!err || err == -ENOTSUP); > > + > > if (err) { > > - /* Notice when a system that supports MSIx can't initialize it */ > > - if (err != -ENOTSUP) { > > - error_report("unable to init msix vectors to %" PRIu32, > > - proxy->nvectors); > > - } > > + error_report_err(*errp); > > proxy->nvectors = 0; > > } > > } > > > > -- > Sincerely, > Cao jin >
On 01/18/2017 12:01 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 02:50:38PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: >> forget to cc maintainers in this new patch >> >> On 01/17/2017 02:18 PM, Cao jin wrote: >>> Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > > I don't like this one, frankly. That's a bunch of code duplication. Yes, code duplication, seems inevitable if move the asserts into a separate patch. > I suspect vfio is the only one who might reasonably get EINVAL here. > So how about e.g. msix_validate_and_init that doesn't assert and use that > from vfio, then switch msix_init to assert instead? > Not sure if I get your idea. Do you mean: do param check via assert in msix_init(), so that no need check its returned error outside, and introduce new api msix_validate_and_init(same content as msix_init, except param check) dedicated to vfio? If I understand you right, the way we do param check for msi_init[*] & msix_init will be inconsistent. [*] patch: msi_init: convert assert to return -errno
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 02:29:19PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: > > > On 01/18/2017 12:01 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 02:50:38PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: > >> forget to cc maintainers in this new patch > >> > >> On 01/17/2017 02:18 PM, Cao jin wrote: > >>> Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > I don't like this one, frankly. That's a bunch of code duplication. > > Yes, code duplication, seems inevitable if move the asserts into a > separate patch. > > > I suspect vfio is the only one who might reasonably get EINVAL here. > > So how about e.g. msix_validate_and_init that doesn't assert and use that > > from vfio, then switch msix_init to assert instead? > > > > Not sure if I get your idea. Do you mean: do param check via assert in > msix_init(), so that no need check its returned error outside, and > introduce new api msix_validate_and_init(same content as msix_init, > except param check) dedicated to vfio? Something like this. > If I understand you right, the way we do param check for msi_init[*] & > msix_init will be inconsistent. Right, we should consolidate these for msi too. > [*] patch: msi_init: convert assert to return -errno > > -- > Sincerely, > Cao jin >
On 01/18/2017 11:21 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 02:29:19PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: >> >> >> On 01/18/2017 12:01 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 02:50:38PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: >>>> forget to cc maintainers in this new patch >>>> >>>> On 01/17/2017 02:18 PM, Cao jin wrote: >>>>> Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >>> >>> I don't like this one, frankly. That's a bunch of code duplication. >> >> Yes, code duplication, seems inevitable if move the asserts into a >> separate patch. >> >>> I suspect vfio is the only one who might reasonably get EINVAL here. >>> So how about e.g. msix_validate_and_init that doesn't assert and use that >>> from vfio, then switch msix_init to assert instead? >>> >> >> Not sure if I get your idea. Do you mean: do param check via assert in >> msix_init(), so that no need check its returned error outside, and >> introduce new api msix_validate_and_init(same content as msix_init, >> except param check) dedicated to vfio? > > Something like this. > >> If I understand you right, the way we do param check for msi_init[*] & >> msix_init will be inconsistent. > > Right, we should consolidate these for msi too. > > I got confused: for msi_init, convert assert to return -errno is a choice from a long discussion: http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg08215.html then now we will revert again? And IIRC, I did use assert in msix_init to do sanity test, and revert as suggest. And this is the way we have done for msi_init: assert the return error outside. And if it need to be modified as your suggestion, I see lots of place need to be taken care, does that worth the trouble? I see there is a simpler way helping us: drop this one from the patchset, at least there is no regression, just a few devices doesn't assert the return error while other(megasas, hcd-xhci) does. What would you say?
On 17/01/2017 17:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > I don't like this one, frankly. That's a bunch of code duplication. > I suspect vfio is the only one who might reasonably get EINVAL here. > So how about e.g. msix_validate_and_init that doesn't assert and use that > from vfio, then switch msix_init to assert instead? The names we use normally would be msix_init and msix_init_nofail. Would still require a change through the whole tree, but it's more consistent at least. Paolo
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 07:18:14PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 17/01/2017 17:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>> Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > > I don't like this one, frankly. That's a bunch of code duplication. > > I suspect vfio is the only one who might reasonably get EINVAL here. > > So how about e.g. msix_validate_and_init that doesn't assert and use that > > from vfio, then switch msix_init to assert instead? > > The names we use normally would be msix_init and msix_init_nofail. > Would still require a change through the whole tree, but it's more > consistent at least. > > Paolo This area has seen too much noise already but OK I guess. Also, msix_init_exclusive_bar probably should assert internally, no need for two versions.
diff --git a/hw/net/e1000e.c b/hw/net/e1000e.c index ed04adce061c..74cbbef30366 100644 --- a/hw/net/e1000e.c +++ b/hw/net/e1000e.c @@ -294,6 +294,10 @@ e1000e_init_msix(E1000EState *s) E1000E_MSIX_IDX, E1000E_MSIX_PBA, 0xA0, NULL); + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) + * is a programming error. Fall back to INTx silently on -ENOTSUP */ + assert(!res || res == -ENOTSUP); + if (res < 0) { trace_e1000e_msix_init_fail(res); } else { diff --git a/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c b/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c index 6e70fddee36b..e394fd61fe64 100644 --- a/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c +++ b/hw/net/rocker/rocker.c @@ -1264,6 +1264,11 @@ static int rocker_msix_init(Rocker *r) &r->msix_bar, ROCKER_PCI_MSIX_BAR_IDX, ROCKER_PCI_MSIX_PBA_OFFSET, 0, &local_err); + + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) + * is a programming error. */ + assert(!err || err == -ENOTSUP); + if (err) { error_report_err(local_err); return err; diff --git a/hw/net/vmxnet3.c b/hw/net/vmxnet3.c index 7b2971fe5902..a433cc017cb1 100644 --- a/hw/net/vmxnet3.c +++ b/hw/net/vmxnet3.c @@ -2193,8 +2193,12 @@ vmxnet3_init_msix(VMXNET3State *s) VMXNET3_MSIX_BAR_IDX, VMXNET3_OFF_MSIX_PBA(s), VMXNET3_MSIX_OFFSET(s), NULL); + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) + * is a programming error. Fall back to INTx on -ENOTSUP */ + assert(!res || res == -ENOTSUP); + if (0 > res) { - VMW_WRPRN("Failed to initialize MSI-X, error %d", res); + VMW_WRPRN("Failed to initialize MSI-X, board's MSI support is broken"); s->msix_used = false; } else { if (!vmxnet3_use_msix_vectors(s, VMXNET3_MAX_INTRS)) { diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c index 4c2c4941d245..2417c78c477e 100644 --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c @@ -1670,13 +1670,14 @@ static void virtio_pci_device_plugged(DeviceState *d, Error **errp) if (proxy->nvectors) { int err = msix_init_exclusive_bar(&proxy->pci_dev, proxy->nvectors, - proxy->msix_bar_idx, NULL); + proxy->msix_bar_idx, errp); + + /* Any error other than -ENOTSUP(board's MSI support is broken) + * is a programming error. */ + assert(!err || err == -ENOTSUP); + if (err) { - /* Notice when a system that supports MSIx can't initialize it */ - if (err != -ENOTSUP) { - error_report("unable to init msix vectors to %" PRIu32, - proxy->nvectors); - } + error_report_err(*errp); proxy->nvectors = 0; } }
Doesn't do it for megasas & hcd-xhci, later patches will fix them. Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> --- hw/net/e1000e.c | 4 ++++ hw/net/rocker/rocker.c | 5 +++++ hw/net/vmxnet3.c | 6 +++++- hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 13 +++++++------ 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)