On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 08:34:07PM +0800, Jinhao Fan wrote:
> }
> sq->timer = timer_new_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL, nvme_process_sq, sq);
>
> + if (n->dbbuf_enabled) {
> + sq->db_addr = n->dbbuf_dbs + (sqid << 3);
> + sq->ei_addr = n->dbbuf_eis + (sqid << 3);
> + }
> +
> assert(n->cq[cqid]);
> cq = n->cq[cqid];
> QTAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&(cq->sq_list), sq, entry);
> @@ -4615,6 +4631,10 @@ static void nvme_init_cq(NvmeCQueue *cq, NvmeCtrl *n,
> uint64_t dma_addr,
> cq->head = cq->tail = 0;
> QTAILQ_INIT(&cq->req_list);
> QTAILQ_INIT(&cq->sq_list);
> + if (n->dbbuf_enabled) {
> + cq->db_addr = n->dbbuf_dbs + (cqid << 3) + (1 << 2);
> + cq->ei_addr = n->dbbuf_eis + (cqid << 3) + (1 << 2);
> + }
> n->cq[cqid] = cq;
> cq->timer = timer_new_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL, nvme_post_cqes, cq);
> }
I just notice these address calculations changed from previous versions. What
happened to taking the doorbell stride into account? Spec says the shadows and
events follow the same stride spacing as the registers.
