|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/vpci: refuse to map BARs at position 0
On 22.05.2025 16:03, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> A BAR at position 0 is not initialized (not positioned). While Xen could
> attempt to map it into the p2m, marking it as mapped will prevent dom0 to
> change the position of the BAR,
With memory decoding enabled, that is?
> as the vPCI code has a shortcomming of not
> allowing to write to BAR registers while the BAR is mapped on the p2m.
Again only under that extra condition, aiui.
> Workaround this limitation by returning false from pci_check_bar() if the
> BAR address is 0, thus causing the bar->enabled field to also be set to
> false and allowing bar_write() to change the BAR position.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/pci.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/pci.c b/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
> index 26bb7f6a3c3a..39fd5a16a4aa 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
> @@ -101,6 +101,15 @@ int pci_conf_write_intercept(unsigned int seg, unsigned
> int bdf,
>
> bool pci_check_bar(const struct pci_dev *pdev, mfn_t start, mfn_t end)
> {
> + /*
> + * Refuse to map BARs at position 0, those are not initialized. This
> might
> + * be required by Linux, that can reposition BARs with memory decoding
> + * enabled. By returning false here bar->enabled will be set to false,
> and
> + * bar_write() will work as expected.
> + */
> + if ( mfn_eq(start, _mfn(0)) )
> + return false;
Is this really x86-specific?
Jan
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |