Re: [PATCH 3/4] vfio-pci/zdev: define the vfio_zdev header

From: Matthew Rosato
Date: Tue Sep 22 2020 - 09:56:03 EST

On 9/22/20 6:54 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2020 11:28:37 -0400
Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

We define a new device region in vfio.h to be able to get the ZPCI CLP
information by reading this region from userspace.

We create a new file, vfio_zdev.h to define the structure of the new
region defined in vfio.h

Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
include/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 5 ++
include/uapi/linux/vfio_zdev.h | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 121 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/vfio_zdev.h

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
index 9204705..65eb367 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
@@ -326,6 +326,11 @@ struct vfio_region_info_cap_type {
* to do TLB invalidation on a GPU.
+ * IBM zPCI specific hardware feature information for a devcie. The contents
+ * of this region are mapped by struct vfio_region_zpci_info.
+ */

This is not really for a 10de vendor, but for all pci devices accessed
via zpci, isn't it?
s/10de/1014/ (10de is the set of regions prior to this one)


But yes, this region is intended to be assigned to all pci devices accessed thru zpci. But the next patch always assigns the region to the zpci device using type 1014 subtype 2 (and userspace always searches using that pair) -- So it should always be unique as I understand it unless someone re-defines another type 1014 subtype 2?

We obviously want to avoid collisions here; not really sure how to
cover all possible vendors. Maybe just pick a high number?

I don't think this is necessary unless I'm misunderstanding something.

/* sub-types for VFIO_REGION_TYPE_GFX */
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio_zdev.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio_zdev.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c9e4891
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio_zdev.h
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
+ * Region definition for ZPCI devices
+ *
+ * Copyright IBM Corp. 2020
+ *
+ * Author(s): Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+ * Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+ */
+#ifndef _VFIO_ZDEV_H_
+#define _VFIO_ZDEV_H_
+#include <linux/types.h>
+ * struct vfio_region_zpci_info - ZPCI information
+ *
+ * This region provides zPCI specific hardware feature information for a
+ * device.
+ *
+ * The ZPCI information structure is presented as a chain of CLP features

"CLP features" == "features returned by the CLP instruction", I guess?
Maybe mention that explicitly?

Yes, that's correct. I'm trying to clarify that these things aren't a 1:1 relationship to a CLP instruction payload.

+ * defined below. argsz provides the size of the entire region, and offset
+ * provides the location of the first CLP feature in the chain.
+ *
+ */
+struct vfio_region_zpci_info {
+ __u32 argsz; /* Size of entire payload */
+ __u32 offset; /* Location of first entry */
+} __packed;

This '__packed' annotation seems redundant. I think that all of these
structures should be defined in a way that packing is unneeded (which
seems to be the case on a quick browse.)

OK, I'll double-check and remove the __packed annotation.

+ * struct vfio_region_zpci_info_hdr - ZPCI header information
+ *
+ * This structure is included at the top of each CLP feature to define what
+ * type of CLP feature is presented / the structure version. The next value
+ * defines the offset of the next CLP feature, and is an offset from the very
+ * beginning of the region (vfio_region_zpci_info).
+ *
+ * Each CLP feature must have it's own unique 'id'.


Is the 'id' something that is already provided by the CLP instruction?

No, these IDs correspond only to the API for the vfio region and don't directly relate to which CLP instruction they are associated with. The term 'CLP feature' was intended to abstract these structures from individual CLP instructions.

So, it might help to explain the design a bit here -- The CLP instructions each return a specific, hardware-architected payload. But we're not sending the entirety of that payload to the guest, rather identifying a subset to forward via the vfio region. Currently, I've sub-divided it as follows:

1) query pci info we currently care about
2) query pci fg info we currently care about
3) utility string
4) function path

This was done in such a way that, when we need to add further CLP information to this region (ex: new device support, new zpci feature support, etc) we can do so by adding new 'CLP features' to the region. Those 'CLP features' could be additional parts of the query pci CLP, additional parts of the query pci fg CLP, or parts of some other CLP. Technically, #3 and #4 are part of query pci info, but the nature of the way they are sized made it more convenient to make them separate features.

Userspace can then scan the region only for the 'CLP features' it understands (or is enabled for) and pick only those (and use defaults and/or turn support off for 'CLP features' it cannot find but expected to).

+ */
+struct vfio_region_zpci_info_hdr {
+ __u16 id; /* Identifies the CLP type */
+ __u16 version; /* version of the CLP data */
+ __u32 next; /* Offset of next entry */
+} __packed;
+ * struct vfio_region_zpci_info_qpci - Initial Query PCI information
+ *
+ * This region provides an initial set of data from the Query PCI Function

What does 'initial' mean in this context? Information you get for a
freshly initialized function?

So this goes back to my statement above about 'query pci info we currently care about' - It's not the entire query pci payload and I was trying to avoid implying it was to prevent future confusion. So 'initial' is more in a sense of 'what we initially care to send to userspace.'

But really, the vfio region API doesn't care which CLP the info came from / where userspace is planning to stick these fields -- Perhaps I should drop 'initial' and re-phrase without mentioning the CLP itself. This feature is providing basic descriptive information about the device, so maybe something like "Base zPCI device information"

+ * CLP.
+ */
+struct vfio_region_zpci_info_qpci {
+ struct vfio_region_zpci_info_hdr hdr;
+ __u64 start_dma; /* Start of available DMA addresses */
+ __u64 end_dma; /* End of available DMA addresses */
+ __u16 pchid; /* Physical Channel ID */
+ __u16 vfn; /* Virtual function number */
+ __u16 fmb_length; /* Measurement Block Length (in bytes) */
+ __u8 pft; /* PCI Function Type */
+ __u8 gid; /* PCI function group ID */
+} __packed;
+ * struct vfio_region_zpci_info_qpcifg - Initial Query PCI Function Group info
+ *
+ * This region provides an initial set of data from the Query PCI Function
+ * Group CLP.
+ */

And the same thing here -- It's the subset of query pci fg info we currently care about -- So I can rename and drop the 'Initial' bit. Something like "Base zPCI group information"

+struct vfio_region_zpci_info_qpcifg {
+ struct vfio_region_zpci_info_hdr hdr;
+ __u64 dasm; /* DMA Address space mask */
+ __u64 msi_addr; /* MSI address */
+ __u64 flags;
+#define VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_FLAGS_REFRESH 1 /* Use program-specified TLB refresh */
+ __u16 mui; /* Measurement Block Update Interval */
+ __u16 noi; /* Maximum number of MSIs */
+ __u16 maxstbl; /* Maximum Store Block Length */
+ __u8 version; /* Supported PCI Version */
+} __packed;
+ * struct vfio_region_zpci_info_util - Utility String
+ *
+ * This region provides the utility string for the associated device, which is
+ * a device identifier string.

Is there an upper boundary for this string?

Is this a classic NUL-terminated string, or a list of EBCDIC characters?

EBCDIC characters.

So, there is indeed an upper-boundary for the string, CLP_UTIL_STR_LEN. It's coming from a hardware-architected field and shouldn't change size, but we send the length anyway so that the API can act independent of the CLP hardware region. So the expectation is that userspace (qemu) would compare the provided size of the util_str with what it expects the CLP hardware payload to look like -- If it's too big, userspace can't use that string to properly emulate the CLP response so it would have to ignore this feature and use defaults.

+ */
+struct vfio_region_zpci_info_util {
+ struct vfio_region_zpci_info_hdr hdr;
+ __u32 size;
+ __u8 util_str[];
+} __packed;
+ * struct vfio_region_zpci_info_pfip - PCI Function Path
+ *
+ * This region provides the PCI function path string, which is an identifier
+ * that describes the internal hardware path of the device.

Same question here.

Hex string bounded by CLP_PFIP_NR_SEGMENTS and again coming from a hardware-architected field that shouldn't change -- the rest of my answer from above applies here too.

+ */
+struct vfio_region_zpci_info_pfip {
+struct vfio_region_zpci_info_hdr hdr;
+ __u32 size;
+ __u8 pfip[];
+} __packed;