Re: [PATCH v6 1/1] rust: pci: add extended capability and SR-IOV support
"Alexandre Courbot" <[email protected]> Fri, 31 Jul 2026 21:52:22 +0900
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.rust-for-linux,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pci |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 9:38 PM JST, Gary Guo wrote: > On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 10:57 AM BST, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 3:45 AM JST, Gary Guo wrote: >>> On Thu Jul 30, 2026 at 7:29 PM BST, Zhi Wang wrote: >>>> Rust PCI drivers have no typed interface for locating and accessing PCIe >>>> extended capabilities. >>>> >>>> The SR-IOV extended capability describes VF topology and VF BARs. Expose >>>> this information through the Rust PCI abstraction so drivers can use the >>>> existing typed configuration-space accessors instead of raw bindings. >>>> >>>> Define ExtCapability to associate a capability ID with a register layout, >>>> and add ConfigSpace::find_ext_capability() to locate and project that >>>> layout. Bound the view at the next capability or the end of extended >>>> configuration space. Add ExtSriovRegs and a decoded VF BAR helper that >>>> returns the address, width, and next configuration-space slot, using >>>> PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS for the number of BAR slots. Since PCI_EXT_CAP_NEXT() >>>> is a function-like macro, expose it through a Rust helper. >>>> >>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/ >>>> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: Gary Guo <[email protected]> >>>> Signed-off-by: Zhi Wang <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> rust/helpers/pci.c | 5 + >>>> rust/kernel/pci.rs | 8 ++ >>>> rust/kernel/pci/cap.rs | 236 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 249 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 rust/kernel/pci/cap.rs >>>> >>>> diff --git a/rust/kernel/pci/cap.rs b/rust/kernel/pci/cap.rs >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 000000000000..08c044bedb70 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/rust/kernel/pci/cap.rs >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@ >>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >>>> + >>>> +//! PCI extended capability support. >>>> + >>>> +use super::{ >>>> + io::ConfigSpaceBackend, >>>> + ConfigSpace, >>>> + Extended, // >>>> +}; >>>> +use crate::{ >>>> + bindings, >>>> + io::{ >>>> + Io, >>>> + IoBackend, >>>> + Region, // >>>> + }, >>>> + prelude::*, >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> +/// Number of VF BAR register slots in an SR-IOV capability. >>>> +// CAST: `PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS` is 6, which fits in `usize`. >>>> +const NUM_VF_BARS: usize = bindings::PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS as usize; >>>> + >>>> +/// Attribute bits encoded in the low DWORD of a memory BAR. >>>> +const VF_MEMORY_BAR_ATTRIBUTE_BITS: u32 = bindings::PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE >>>> + | bindings::PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK >>>> + | bindings::PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_PREFETCH; >>>> + >>>> +/// PCI extended capability IDs. >>>> +#[repr(u16)] >>>> +#[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq)] >>>> +pub enum ExtCapId { >>>> + /// Single Root I/O Virtualization. >>>> + // CAST: `PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_SRIOV` is `0x10`, which fits in `u16`. >>>> + Sriov = bindings::PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_SRIOV as u16, >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +impl ExtCapId { >>>> + fn as_raw(self) -> u16 { >>>> + self as u16 >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +/// A typed PCI extended capability register layout. >>>> +/// >>>> +/// Implementors describe the register layout of one extended capability. The layout must start at >>>> +/// the extended capability header, and [`Self::ID`] must identify that layout. >>>> +pub trait ExtCapability: FromBytes + IntoBytes { >>>> + /// PCI extended capability ID for this register layout. >>>> + const ID: ExtCapId; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +impl<'a> ConfigSpace<'a, Extended> { >>>> + /// Finds and projects an extended capability into its typed register layout. >>>> + /// >>>> + /// # Examples >>>> + /// >>>> + /// ```no_run >>>> + /// use kernel::pci; >>>> + /// >>>> + /// fn probe_sriov( >>>> + /// pdev: &pci::Device<kernel::device::Bound>, >>>> + /// ) -> Result<(), kernel::error::Error> { >>>> + /// let sriov = pdev >>>> + /// .config_space_extended()? >>>> + /// .find_ext_capability::<pci::ExtSriovRegs>()?; >>>> + /// >>>> + /// let total_vfs = kernel::io_read!(sriov, .total_vfs); >>>> + /// let vf_offset = kernel::io_read!(sriov, .vf_offset); >>>> + /// let bar0 = sriov.read_vf_bar(0)?; >>>> + /// let bar1 = sriov.read_vf_bar(bar0.next_index())?; >>>> + /// >>>> + /// Ok(()) >>>> + /// } >>>> + /// ``` >>>> + pub fn find_ext_capability<C: ExtCapability>(&self) -> Result<ConfigSpace<'a, C>> { >>>> + let offset = usize::from( >>>> + // SAFETY: `self.pdev` is valid by the type invariant of `ConfigSpace`. >>>> + unsafe { >>>> + bindings::pci_find_ext_capability(self.pdev.as_raw(), i32::from(C::ID.as_raw())) >>>> + }, >>>> + ); >>>> + >>>> + if offset == 0 { >>>> + return Err(ENODEV); >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + let size = self.calculate_ext_cap_size(offset); >>>> + >>>> + let base = ConfigSpaceBackend::as_ptr(*self) >>>> + .cast::<u8>() >>>> + .wrapping_add(offset); >>>> + let ptr = Region::<0>::ptr_try_from_raw_parts_mut(base, size)?; >>> >>> The signature should be >>> >>> Result<Option<...>> >>> >>> where the result is usually handled via `?` and `None` needs to be handled >>> explicitly, rather than matching on ENODEV. >>> >>>> + >>>> + // SAFETY: `offset` was returned by `pci_find_ext_capability`, and >>>> + // `calculate_ext_cap_size` bounds `ptr` at the next capability or the end of the extended >>>> + // configuration space. `ptr_try_from_raw_parts_mut` verified the region layout. >>>> + let capability = unsafe { ConfigSpaceBackend::project_view(*self, ptr) }; >>>> + >>>> + capability.try_cast::<C>() >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + /// Calculates the size of the extended capability at `offset`. >>>> + /// >>>> + /// The capability extends to the next extended capability, or to the end of the extended >>>> + /// configuration space if it is the last one. `offset` must be a DWORD-aligned offset within >>>> + /// the extended configuration space returned by `pci_find_ext_capability`. If its header >>>> + /// cannot be read, the capability is treated as the last one. >>>> + fn calculate_ext_cap_size(&self, offset: usize) -> usize { >>>> + let header = self.try_read32(offset).unwrap_or(0); >>>> + // SAFETY: Pure bit manipulation, no preconditions. >>>> + // CAST: The next-cap pointer is a 12-bit field (max 0xFFC), always fits in `usize`. >>>> + let next = unsafe { bindings::pci_ext_cap_next(header) } as usize; >>>> + >>>> + if next > offset { >>>> + next - offset >>>> + } else { >>>> + (*self).size() - offset >>>> + } >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +/// SR-IOV register layout per PCIe spec (64 bytes starting at cap offset). >>>> +#[repr(C)] >>>> +#[derive(FromBytes, IntoBytes)] >>>> +pub struct ExtSriovRegs { >>>> + /// Extended capability header. >>>> + pub header: u32, >>>> + /// SR-IOV capabilities. >>>> + pub cap: u32, >>>> + /// SR-IOV control. >>>> + pub ctrl: u16, >>>> + /// SR-IOV status. >>>> + pub status: u16, >>>> + /// Initial VFs. >>>> + pub initial_vfs: u16, >>>> + /// Total VFs. >>>> + pub total_vfs: u16, >>>> + /// Number of VFs. >>>> + pub num_vfs: u16, >>>> + /// Function dependency link. >>>> + pub func_dep_link: u8, >>>> + _reserved_0: u8, >>>> + /// First VF offset. >>>> + pub vf_offset: u16, >>>> + /// VF stride. >>>> + pub vf_stride: u16, >>>> + _reserved_1: u16, >>>> + /// VF device ID. >>>> + pub vf_device_id: u16, >>>> + /// Supported page sizes. >>>> + pub supported_page_sizes: u32, >>>> + /// System page size. >>>> + pub system_page_size: u32, >>>> + /// VF BARs (BAR0–BAR5). >>>> + pub vf_bar: [u32; NUM_VF_BARS], >>>> + /// VF migration state array offset. >>>> + pub migration_state: u32, >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +impl ExtCapability for ExtSriovRegs { >>>> + const ID: ExtCapId = ExtCapId::Sriov; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +/// A typed view of an SR-IOV extended capability. >>>> +pub type ExtSriovCapability<'a> = ConfigSpace<'a, ExtSriovRegs>; >>>> + >>>> +/// A decoded VF memory BAR. >>>> +#[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq)] >>>> +pub struct ExtSriovVfBar { >>>> + address: u64, >>>> + is_64bit: bool, >>>> + next_index: usize, >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +impl ExtSriovVfBar { >>>> + /// Returns the BAR address without PCI attribute bits. >>>> + #[inline] >>>> + pub fn address(&self) -> u64 { >>>> + self.address >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + /// Returns whether the BAR is 64-bit. >>>> + #[inline] >>>> + pub fn is_64bit(&self) -> bool { >>>> + self.is_64bit >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + /// Returns the configuration-space slot index of the next logical BAR. >>>> + #[inline] >>>> + pub fn next_index(&self) -> usize { >>>> + self.next_index >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +impl ConfigSpace<'_, ExtSriovRegs> { >>>> + /// Reads and decodes the VF memory BAR at configuration-space slot `bar_index`. >>>> + #[inline] >>>> + pub fn read_vf_bar(&self, bar_index: usize) -> Result<ExtSriovVfBar> { >>> >>> Do you expect people to pass in a random index instead of 0 or next_index? If >>> not, this should be an iterator. Otherwise it'd be possible to index into high >>> part of 64-bit address. >> >> I made a similar suggestion on patch 3 [1], and I think Zhi kept the >> index for ergonomic reasons. But given that not all indices within range >> are valid, an iterator indeed sounds safer. >> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ >> >>> >>>> + if bar_index >= NUM_VF_BARS { >>>> + return Err(EINVAL); >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + let low = crate::io_read!(*self, .vf_bar[try: bar_index]); >>> >>> Given the bound checking above I'd use `panic: ` here. >> >> Or better, one could just remove the `if bar_index >= ...` block, and >> keep the `try:`. That way it will be used for what is was designed for, >> the bounds checking will be done against the actual size of the array >> and not a constant that also happens to be used as the array size, and a >> dedicated error code will be returned instead of the ubiquitous >> `EINVAL`. > > `projection::OutOfBound` converts to `ERANGE` so it'll be different. Also, when > this is converted to iterators, for the first case you'd probably want to just > return `None` and for the second case log an error that the device is having out > of spec capability. Yeah iterators are probably going to make this moot anyway.