Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:47:47 -0500 | From | Alex Elder <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v13 06/24] gunyah: rsc_mgr: Add resource manager RPC core |
| |
On 5/9/23 3:47 PM, Elliot Berman wrote: > The resource manager is a special virtual machine which is always > running on a Gunyah system. It provides APIs for creating and destroying > VMs, secure memory management, sharing/lending of memory between VMs, > and setup of inter-VM communication. Calls to the resource manager are > made via message queues. > > This patch implements the basic probing and RPC mechanism to make those > API calls. Request/response calls can be made with gh_rm_call. > Drivers can also register to notifications pushed by RM via > gh_rm_register_notifier > > Specific API calls that resource manager supports will be implemented in > subsequent patches. > > Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com>
I have some comments below, but none is critical so whether or not you address what I mention:
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
> --- > drivers/virt/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile | 4 + > drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c | 702 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.h | 16 + > include/linux/gunyah_rsc_mgr.h | 21 + > 5 files changed, 744 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile > create mode 100644 drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c > create mode 100644 drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.h > create mode 100644 include/linux/gunyah_rsc_mgr.h > > diff --git a/drivers/virt/Makefile b/drivers/virt/Makefile > index e9aa6fc96fab..a5817e2d7d71 100644 > --- a/drivers/virt/Makefile > +++ b/drivers/virt/Makefile > @@ -12,3 +12,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ACRN_HSM) += acrn/ > obj-$(CONFIG_EFI_SECRET) += coco/efi_secret/ > obj-$(CONFIG_SEV_GUEST) += coco/sev-guest/ > obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_GUEST) += coco/tdx-guest/ > +obj-y += gunyah/ > diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile b/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0f5aec834698 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile > @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > + > +gunyah-y += rsc_mgr.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_GUNYAH) += gunyah.o > diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c b/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..88b5beb1ea51 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/rsc_mgr.c > @@ -0,0 +1,702 @@
. . .
> +/** > + * struct gh_rm - private data for communicating w/Gunyah resource manager > + * @dev: pointer to device
This points to the device structure for the RM platform device. (Maybe that's clear...)
> + * @tx_ghrsc: message queue resource to TX to RM > + * @rx_ghrsc: message queue resource to RX from RM > + * @msgq: mailbox instance of TX/RX resources above > + * @msgq_client: mailbox client of above msgq > + * @active_rx_connection: ongoing gh_rm_connection for which we're receiving fragments > + * @last_tx_ret: return value of last mailbox tx > + * @call_xarray: xarray to allocate & lookup sequence IDs for Request/Response flows > + * @next_seq: next ID to allocate (for xa_alloc_cyclic) > + * @cache: cache for allocating Tx messages > + * @send_lock: synchronization to allow only one request to be sent at a time > + * @nh: notifier chain for clients interested in RM notification messages > + */ > +struct gh_rm { > + struct device *dev; > + struct gh_resource tx_ghrsc; > + struct gh_resource rx_ghrsc; > + struct gh_msgq msgq; > + struct mbox_client msgq_client; > + struct gh_rm_connection *active_rx_connection; > + int last_tx_ret; > + > + struct xarray call_xarray; > + u32 next_seq; > + > + struct kmem_cache *cache; > + struct mutex send_lock; > + struct blocking_notifier_head nh; > +}; > + > +/** > + * gh_rm_remap_error() - Remap Gunyah resource manager errors into a Linux error code > + * @rm_error: "Standard" return value from Gunyah resource manager > + */ > +static inline int gh_rm_remap_error(enum gh_rm_error rm_error)
I suggested something similar last time. I you are operating on an rm_error value, so I would call this gh_rm_error_remap().
> +{ > + switch (rm_error) { > + case GH_RM_ERROR_OK: > + return 0; > + case GH_RM_ERROR_UNIMPLEMENTED: > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + case GH_RM_ERROR_NOMEM: > + return -ENOMEM; > + case GH_RM_ERROR_NORESOURCE: > + return -ENODEV; > + case GH_RM_ERROR_DENIED: > + return -EPERM; > + case GH_RM_ERROR_BUSY: > + return -EBUSY; > + case GH_RM_ERROR_INVALID: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_ARGUMENT_INVALID: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_HANDLE_INVALID: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_VALIDATE_FAILED: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_MAP_FAILED: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_MEM_INVALID: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_MEM_INUSE: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_MEM_RELEASED: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_VMID_INVALID: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_LOOKUP_FAILED: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_IRQ_INVALID: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_IRQ_INUSE: > + case GH_RM_ERROR_IRQ_RELEASED: > + return -EINVAL; > + default: > + return -EBADMSG; > + } > +}
. . .
> +static void gh_rm_process_rply(struct gh_rm *rm, void *msg, size_t msg_size) > +{ > + struct gh_rm_rpc_reply_hdr *reply_hdr = msg; > + struct gh_rm_connection *connection; > + u16 seq_id; > + > + seq_id = le16_to_cpu(reply_hdr->hdr.seq); > + connection = xa_load(&rm->call_xarray, seq_id); > + > + if (!connection || connection->msg_id != reply_hdr->hdr.msg_id) > + return;
Do either of the above conditions warrant reporting a warning if it occurs? Or are these expected to be possible--and if either occur they're harmless if handled this way?
> + > + if (rm->active_rx_connection) > + gh_rm_abort_connection(rm); > + > + if (gh_rm_init_connection_payload(connection, msg, sizeof(*reply_hdr), msg_size)) { > + dev_err(rm->dev, "Failed to alloc connection buffer for sequence %d\n", seq_id); > + /* Send connection complete and error the client. */ > + connection->reply.ret = -ENOMEM; > + complete(&connection->reply.seq_done); > + return; > + } > + > + connection->reply.rm_error = le32_to_cpu(reply_hdr->err_code); > + rm->active_rx_connection = connection; > +}
. . .
| |