Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>
---
hw/pci/pcie.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
hw/pci/trace-events | 3 +++
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
diff --git a/hw/pci/pcie.c b/hw/pci/pcie.c
index ccdb2377e1..1a19368994 100644
--- a/hw/pci/pcie.c
+++ b/hw/pci/pcie.c
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
#include "hw/pci/pcie_regs.h"
#include "hw/pci/pcie_port.h"
#include "qemu/range.h"
+#include "trace.h"
//#define DEBUG_PCIE
#ifdef DEBUG_PCIE
@@ -718,6 +719,20 @@ void pcie_cap_slot_get(PCIDevice *dev, uint16_t *slt_ctl, uint16_t *slt_sta)
*slt_sta = pci_get_word(exp_cap + PCI_EXP_SLTSTA);
}
+static const char *pcie_sltctl_pic_str(uint16_t sltctl)
+{
+ switch (sltctl & PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC) {
+ case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_ON:
+ return "on";
+ case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_BLINK:
+ return "blink";
+ case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_OFF:
+ return "off";
+ default:
+ return "?";
+ }
+}
+
void pcie_cap_slot_write_config(PCIDevice *dev,
uint16_t old_slt_ctl, uint16_t old_slt_sta,
uint32_t addr, uint32_t val, int len)
@@ -762,6 +777,11 @@ void pcie_cap_slot_write_config(PCIDevice *dev,
sltsta);
}
+ if ((val & PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC) != (old_slt_ctl & PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC)) {
+ trace_pcie_power_indicator(pcie_sltctl_pic_str(old_slt_ctl),
+ pcie_sltctl_pic_str(val));
+ }
+
/*
* If the slot is populated, power indicator is off and power
* controller is off, it is safe to detach the devices.
diff --git a/hw/pci/trace-events b/hw/pci/trace-events
index aaf46bc92d..ec4a5ff43d 100644
--- a/hw/pci/trace-events
+++ b/hw/pci/trace-events
@@ -15,3 +15,6 @@ msix_write_config(char *name, bool enabled, bool masked) "dev %s enabled %d mask
sriov_register_vfs(const char *name, int slot, int function, int num_vfs) "%s %02x:%x: creating %d vf devs"
sriov_unregister_vfs(const char *name, int slot, int function, int num_vfs) "%s %02x:%x: Unregistering %d vf devs"
sriov_config_write(const char *name, int slot, int fun, uint32_t offset, uint32_t val, uint32_t len) "%s %02x:%x: sriov offset 0x%x val 0x%x len %d"
+
+# pcie.c
+pcie_power_indicator(const char *old, const char *new) "%s -> %s"
--
2.34.1
On 4/2/23 18:47, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>
> ---
> hw/pci/pcie.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> hw/pci/trace-events | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
> +static const char *pcie_sltctl_pic_str(uint16_t sltctl)
> +{
> + switch (sltctl & PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC) {
> + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_ON:
> + return "on";
> + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_BLINK:
> + return "blink";
> + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_OFF:
> + return "off";
> + default:
> + return "?";
Maybe "illegal"?
Otherwise:
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> + }
> +}
Thanks for reviewing!
On 05.02.23 13:56, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 4/2/23 18:47, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>
>> ---
>> hw/pci/pcie.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> hw/pci/trace-events | 3 +++
>> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>
>> +static const char *pcie_sltctl_pic_str(uint16_t sltctl)
>> +{
>> + switch (sltctl & PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC) {
>> + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_ON:
>> + return "on";
>> + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_BLINK:
>> + return "blink";
>> + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_OFF:
>> + return "off";
>> + default:
>> + return "?";
>
> Maybe "illegal"?
I just was unsure about it.
For SHPC, 0 is correct, and means that this command don't change the led state.
But with PCI-e hotplug we don't have such commands but change the led directly, so it must be one of "on"/"blink"/"off", and zero is really wrong, right?
Also, I'm now looking at /* TODO: send event to monitor */ in shpc code, and working on it. So, I think, I'll soon send patches with such event for both SHPC and PCI-e, and probably that trace point becomes not needed.
>
> Otherwise:
>
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
>
>> + }
>> +}
>
--
Best regards,
Vladimir
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 01:39:03PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> Thanks for reviewing!
>
> On 05.02.23 13:56, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > On 4/2/23 18:47, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>
> > > ---
> > > hw/pci/pcie.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > > hw/pci/trace-events | 3 +++
> > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
> >
> > > +static const char *pcie_sltctl_pic_str(uint16_t sltctl)
> > > +{
> > > + switch (sltctl & PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC) {
> > > + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_ON:
> > > + return "on";
> > > + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_BLINK:
> > > + return "blink";
> > > + case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_OFF:
> > > + return "off";
> > > + default:
> > > + return "?";
> >
> > Maybe "illegal"?
>
> I just was unsure about it.
>
> For SHPC, 0 is correct, and means that this command don't change the led state.
>
> But with PCI-e hotplug we don't have such commands but change the led directly, so it must be one of "on"/"blink"/"off", and zero is really wrong, right?
>
>
> Also, I'm now looking at /* TODO: send event to monitor */ in shpc code, and working on it. So, I think, I'll soon send patches with such event for both SHPC and PCI-e, and probably that trace point becomes not needed.
I think it's ok to queue as is, change it with a patch on top.
> >
> > Otherwise:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> >
> > > + }
> > > +}
> >
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Vladimir
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.