On 9/30/18 5:16 PM, Jeff Guo wrote:
Add a new req notifier in eal interrupt for enable vfio hotplug.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Guo <jia....@intel.com>
---
v2->v1:
no change
---
lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_eal_interrupts.h | 1 +
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_interrupts.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 72 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_eal_interrupts.h
b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_eal_interrupts.h
index 6eb4932..2c47738 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_eal_interrupts.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_eal_interrupts.h
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ enum rte_intr_handle_type {
RTE_INTR_HANDLE_EXT, /**< external handler */
RTE_INTR_HANDLE_VDEV, /**< virtual device */
RTE_INTR_HANDLE_DEV_EVENT, /**< device event handle */
+ RTE_INTR_HANDLE_VFIO_REQ, /**< vfio device handle (req) */
Alignment looks inconsistent. Is there any reason?
RTE_INTR_HANDLE_MAX /**< count of elements */
};
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_interrupts.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_interrupts.c
index 4076c6d..7f611b3 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_interrupts.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_interrupts.c
@@ -308,6 +308,64 @@ vfio_disable_msix(const struct rte_intr_handle
*intr_handle) {
return ret;
}
+
+/* enable req notifier */
+static int
+vfio_enable_req(const struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle)
+{
+ int len, ret;
+ char irq_set_buf[IRQ_SET_BUF_LEN];
I see that it is copied from similar functions in the file, but
I'd suggest to initialize it with zeros using '= {};' just to make
sure that uninitialized on-stack data never go to kernel.
+ struct vfio_irq_set *irq_set;
+ int *fd_ptr;
+
+ len = sizeof(irq_set_buf);
+
+ irq_set = (struct vfio_irq_set *) irq_set_buf;
+ irq_set->argsz = len;
+ irq_set->count = 1;
+ irq_set->flags = VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_EVENTFD |
+ VFIO_IRQ_SET_ACTION_TRIGGER;
+ irq_set->index = VFIO_PCI_REQ_IRQ_INDEX;
It looks like it is the only difference (plus error log below) from
vfio_enable_msi(). May be it make sense to restructure code
to avoid duplication. Obviously it is not critical, but please, consider.
Similar comment is applicable to vfio_disable_req() below.
+ irq_set->start = 0;
+ fd_ptr = (int *) &irq_set->data;
+ *fd_ptr = intr_handle->fd;
+
+ ret = ioctl(intr_handle->vfio_dev_fd, VFIO_DEVICE_SET_IRQS, irq_set);
+
+ if (ret) {
+ RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Error enabling req interrupts for fd %d\n",
+ intr_handle->fd);
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/* disable req notifier */
+static int
+vfio_disable_req(const struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle)
+{
+ struct vfio_irq_set *irq_set;
+ char irq_set_buf[IRQ_SET_BUF_LEN];
+ int len, ret;
+
+ len = sizeof(struct vfio_irq_set);
+
+ irq_set = (struct vfio_irq_set *) irq_set_buf;
+ irq_set->argsz = len;
+ irq_set->count = 0;
+ irq_set->flags = VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE | VFIO_IRQ_SET_ACTION_TRIGGER;
+ irq_set->index = VFIO_PCI_REQ_IRQ_INDEX;
+ irq_set->start = 0;
+
+ ret = ioctl(intr_handle->vfio_dev_fd, VFIO_DEVICE_SET_IRQS, irq_set);
+
+ if (ret)
+ RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Error disabling req interrupts for fd %d\n",
+ intr_handle->fd);
+
+ return ret;
+}
#endif
static int
@@ -556,6 +614,10 @@ rte_intr_enable(const struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle)
if (vfio_enable_intx(intr_handle))
return -1;
break;
+ case RTE_INTR_HANDLE_VFIO_REQ:
+ if (vfio_enable_req(intr_handle))
+ return -1;
+ break;
#endif
/* not used at this moment */
case RTE_INTR_HANDLE_DEV_EVENT:
@@ -606,6 +668,11 @@ rte_intr_disable(const struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle)
if (vfio_disable_intx(intr_handle))
return -1;
break;
+ case RTE_INTR_HANDLE_VFIO_REQ:
+ if (vfio_disable_req(intr_handle))
+ return -1;
+ break;
+
#endif
/* not used at this moment */
case RTE_INTR_HANDLE_DEV_EVENT:
@@ -682,6 +749,10 @@ eal_intr_process_interrupts(struct epoll_event *events,
int nfds)
bytes_read = 0;
call = true;
break;
+ case RTE_INTR_HANDLE_VFIO_REQ:
+ bytes_read = 0;
+ call = true;
+ break;
default:
bytes_read = 1;
break;
