Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-43543-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:01:13 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@amd.com>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Hildebrand, Stewart" <Stewart.Hildebrand@amd.com>,
	"Huang, Ray" <Ray.Huang@amd.com>,
	"Ragiadakou, Xenia" <Xenia.Ragiadakou@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC KERNEL PATCH v4 3/3] PCI/sysfs: Add gsi sysfs for pci_dev
Message-ID: <20240129220113.GA475965@bhelgaas>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BL1PR12MB5849B51FADC8226764078A98E77A2@BL1PR12MB5849.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:17:24AM +0000, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/1/24 00:02, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:13:52AM +0000, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> >> On 2024/1/23 07:37, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 02:22:17PM +0800, Jiqian Chen wrote:
> >>>> There is a need for some scenarios to use gsi sysfs.
> >>>> For example, when xen passthrough a device to dumU, it will
> >>>> use gsi to map pirq, but currently userspace can't get gsi
> >>>> number.
> >>>> So, add gsi sysfs for that and for other potential scenarios.
> >> ...
> > 
> >>> I don't know enough about Xen to know why it needs the GSI in
> >>> userspace.  Is this passthrough brand new functionality that can't be
> >>> done today because we don't expose the GSI yet?

I assume this must be new functionality, i.e., this kind of
passthrough does not work today, right?

> >> has ACPI support and is responsible for detecting and controlling
> >> the hardware, also it performs privileged operations such as the
> >> creation of normal (unprivileged) domains DomUs. When we give to a
> >> DomU direct access to a device, we need also to route the physical
> >> interrupts to the DomU. In order to do so Xen needs to setup and map
> >> the interrupts appropriately.
> > 
> > What kernel interfaces are used for this setup and mapping?
>
> For passthrough devices, the setup and mapping of routing physical
> interrupts to DomU are done on Xen hypervisor side, hypervisor only
> need userspace to provide the GSI info, see Xen code:
> xc_physdev_map_pirq require GSI and then will call hypercall to pass
> GSI into hypervisor and then hypervisor will do the mapping and
> routing, kernel doesn't do the setup and mapping.

So we have to expose the GSI to userspace not because userspace itself
uses it, but so userspace can turn around and pass it back into the
kernel?

It seems like it would be better for userspace to pass an identifier
of the PCI device itself back into the hypervisor.  Then the interface
could be generic and potentially work even on non-ACPI systems where
the GSI concept doesn't apply.

> For devices on PVH Dom0, Dom0 setups interrupts for devices as the
> baremetal Linux kernel does, through using acpi_pci_irq_enable->
> acpi_register_gsi-> __acpi_register_gsi->acpi_register_gsi_ioapic.

This case sounds like it's all inside Linux, so I assume there's no
problem with this one?  If you can call acpi_pci_irq_enable(), you
have the pci_dev, so I assume there's no need to expose the GSI in
sysfs?

Bjorn