From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>, pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-qemu-server-rs v3 1/9] add pve-qemu-server-pci crate for guest PCI address generation
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 10:10:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb4be018-ef64-405c-a7a5-01784f1610b3@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0bc1ecb7-9b92-4bae-9353-c67b998ab48e@proxmox.com>
On 11/10/26 5:03 PM, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> Nice work!
>
> Just wondering: did you also test the changes with maximal configs, i.e.
> where all devices (except conflicting ones) are configured at the same
> time? The resulting config is likely too big to be worth committing in
> the cfg2cmd tests, but still might be nice to check.
nope not yet, but even if that test is big, i guess it would
be a nice test regardless, i'll send it for qemu-server
(actually 3, once for i440x, q35 and virt)
>
> Am 06.11.26 um 2:28 PM schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>> +/// The parts of a guest configuration that influence which PCI layout is used
>> +/// and which quirks have to be applied to it.
>> +///
>> +/// This is deliberately not the full guest config: it only carries what the
>> +/// address generation needs, so that callers can build it from whatever
>> +/// configuration representation they have.
>> +#[derive(Default, Clone, Debug)]
>> +pub struct HardwareConfig {
>> + pub arch: Arch,
>> + pub mainboard: Mainboard,
>> + pub scsihw: Option<QemuConfigScsihw>,
>> + /// Highest `scsihw` controller index in use. Controllers from index 2 on
>> + /// live on `pci.4`, so this decides whether that bridge is needed.
>> + pub max_scsihw: u8,
>
> The two SCSI-related options could be grouped in a struct.
>
>> + pub legacy_igd: bool,
>> + pub ostype: Option<QemuConfigOstype>,
>> + /// QEMU machine version as `(major, minor, pve)`, where the PVE specific
>> + /// revision is optional.
>> + pub machine_version: (u16, u16, Option<u16>),
>
> I would prefer a dedicated struct rather than a tuple here. And maybe it
> could also include the mainboard and required_pve_version? Or maybe that
> bigger one could be a second-level struct with the version struct inside
> of it? Not sure what is nicer in practice.
so basically a 'machine' struct?
yeah that makes sense.
>
>> + /// The recorded required `+pveX` version
>> + pub required_pve_version: Arc<AtomicU16>,
>> +}
>> +
>> +impl HardwareConfig {
>> + /// Builds a [`HardwareConfig`] from the raw configuration values.
>> + ///
>> + /// Unparsable `arch`, `scsihw` and `ostype` values are not an error here:
>> + /// `arch` falls back to x86_64 and the other two to `None`, which is the
>> + /// same defaulting the Perl implementation does.
>
> Arch falls back to the host architecture, not x86_64.
true.
Would it be better if we expect explicit values here and not fall
back to anything (so let perl handle the defaults for now)
and raise an error otherwise?
>
>> + pub fn new(params: HardwareConfigParams) -> Self {
>> + let arch = params
>> + .arch
>> + .parse()
>> + .unwrap_or(ClusterResourceHostArch::X8664)
>> + .into();
>> + let scsihw = params.scsihw.and_then(|hw| hw.parse().ok());
>> + let ostype = params.ostype.and_then(|ostype| ostype.parse().ok());
>> +
>> + let mainboard = match arch {
>> + Arch::Aarch64 => Mainboard::Virt,
>> + Arch::X8664 if params.machine_type.contains("q35") => Mainboard::Q35,
>> + Arch::X8664 => Mainboard::I440fx,
>
> You must not rely on the default for the arch here, since we don't
> enforce that a machine type matches the arch currently:
>
> [I] root@pve9a1 ~# qm create 100 --machine virt --arch x86_64
> [I] root@pve9a1 ~# cat /etc/pve/qemu-server/100.conf
> arch: x86_64
> boot:
> machine: virt
> meta: creation-qemu=11.1.3,ctime=1794318573
> smbios1: uuid=e325ddd6-f74b-4a08-be42-b618f2924a9e
> vmgenid: ff99f0bf-96ef-44fe-9861-481c506c65ff
also true, but this can't work anyway ? no virt on x86 and no q35/i440fx
on aarch64, so this should really be enforced somewhere in our stack
before trying to start qemu?
>
>> + };
>> + Self {
>> + arch,
>> + mainboard,
>> + scsihw,
>> + max_scsihw: params.max_scsihw,
>> + legacy_igd: params.legacy_igd,
>> + ostype,
>> + machine_version: (params.major, params.minor, params.pve),
>> + required_pve_version: Arc::new(AtomicU16::new(0)),
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>
> ---snip 8<---
>
>> +impl std::str::FromStr for Bus {
>> + type Err = LayoutError;
>> +
>> + fn from_str(s: &str) -> Result<Self, Self::Err> {
>> + // NOTE: the prefixes here must be checked before the generic 'pve.'
>> + // one below, which would otherwise swallow them.
>
> Where is the "pve." prefix? Is this still a left-over comment?
yeah the comment should be introduced later ;)
>
>> + const PREFIXES: &[(&str, BusConstructor)] = &[
>> + ("pci.", Bus::Pci),
>> + ("pcie.", Bus::Pcie),
>> + #[expect(deprecated)]
>> + ("ich9-pcie-port-", Bus::LegacyRootPort),
>> + ];
>> +
>> + if s == "pcidmi" {
>> + return Ok(Bus::Pcidmi);
>> + }
>> +
>> + for (prefix, c) in PREFIXES {
>> + if let Some(rest) = s.strip_prefix(prefix) {
>> + let index: u8 = rest.parse().map_err(|_| LayoutError::InvalidConfigId)?;
>> + return Ok(c(index));
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + Err(LayoutError::InvalidConfigId)
>> + }
>> +}
>
> ---snip 8<---
>
>> +/// The address a layout assigns to a device.
>> +#[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq, Hash)]
>> +pub struct AddressAssignment {
>> + pub addr: PciAddress,
>> + pub device: Device,
>> + /// Whether QEMU has to be told that other functions of this slot are in
>> + /// use. Only ever set on function 0.
>
> Should there be a check for this with a new() function? Or would that
> complicate things too much?
mhmm i'll see. I tried to have most of the code free of Result's
and do most of it statically, but can still make sense
>
>
>> + pub multifunction: bool,
>> +}
>
> ---snip 8<---
>
>> diff --git a/pve-qemu-server-pci/src/types/pci_address.rs b/pve-qemu-server-pci/src/types/pci_address.rs
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..dcef298
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/pve-qemu-server-pci/src/types/pci_address.rs
>> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
>> +use crate::Bus;
>> +
>> +/// The complete address of a device: the bus it sits on plus the slot and
>> +/// function number within that bus.
>> +#[derive(Hash, Debug, Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq)]
>> +pub struct PciAddress {
>> + pub bus: Bus,
>> + pub device: u8,
>> + pub function: u8,
>> +}
>> +
>> +impl PciAddress {
>> + pub const fn new(bus: Bus, device: u8, function: u8) -> Self {
>
> Should there be a check for constraints, e.g. that
> function < FUNCTIONS_PER_DEVICE? Or would that complicate things too much?
same here as above, i'll try
>
>> + Self {
>> + bus,
>> + device,
>> + function,
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + /// Renders the address as the `,bus=...,addr=...` suffix of a QEMU
>> + /// `-device` argument, including the leading comma.
>> + ///
>> + /// The function number is only emitted when it is not zero, matching what
>> + /// the Perl implementation produces.
>> + pub fn to_qemu_addr(&self) -> String {
>> + let bus = self.bus;
>> + let function = if self.function > 0 {
>> + format!(".{}", self.function)
>> + } else {
>> + String::new()
>> + };
>> +
>> + format!(",bus={bus},addr=0x{:x}{function}", self.device)
>> + }
>> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-11 9:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-06 13:25 [RFC proxmox-perl-rs/qemu-server/qemu-server-rs v3 0/9] pci-handling rewrite (part 1/2/3) Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH pve-qemu-server-rs v3 1/9] add pve-qemu-server-pci crate for guest PCI address generation Dominik Csapak
2026-11-10 16:03 ` Fiona Ebner
2026-11-10 16:32 ` Fiona Ebner
2026-11-11 9:10 ` Dominik Csapak [this message]
2026-11-11 9:19 ` Fiona Ebner
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH pve-qemu-server-rs v3 2/9] pci: legacy: generate pci bridges Dominik Csapak
2026-11-10 16:23 ` Fiona Ebner
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH pve-qemu-server-rs v3 3/9] pci: legacy: generate q35 chipset devices and hostpcie root ports Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH pve-qemu-server-rs v3 4/9] pci: layout: add grouped PCI and PCIe layouts Dominik Csapak
2026-11-10 17:08 ` Fiona Ebner
2026-11-11 9:58 ` Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH proxmox-perl-rs v3 5/9] pve: add bindings for `pve-qemu-server-pci` crate Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH qemu-server v3 6/9] pci: use PVE::RS::PCI bindings for addresses and bus devices Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH qemu-server v3 7/9] tree-wide: use HardwareConfig for the machine version checks Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH qemu-server v3 8/9] cfg2cmd: q35: generate chipset devices with machine version 11.1+pve1 Dominik Csapak
2026-11-06 13:25 ` [PATCH qemu-server v3 9/9] machine: add 'pci-layout' option Dominik Csapak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=eb4be018-ef64-405c-a7a5-01784f1610b3@proxmox.com \
--to=d.csapak@proxmox.com \
--cc=f.ebner@proxmox.com \
--cc=pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox