fix(virtio/pci): map BARs only once

[cagatay-y]

It is possible for multiple capabilities to be accessed through the same base address, so only create a new mapping if one does not already exist for the BAR slot.

[github-actions]

Benchmark Results

Details

Benchmark	Current: 79de297	Previous: 2e23902	Performance Ratio
startup_benchmark Build Time	81.37 s	80.34 s	1.01 ❗
startup_benchmark File Size	0.76 MB	0.80 MB	0.95 ❗
Startup Time - 1 core	0.72 s (±0.02 s)	0.75 s (±0.02 s)	0.97
Startup Time - 2 cores	0.73 s (±0.02 s)	0.74 s (±0.02 s)	0.99
Startup Time - 4 cores	0.74 s (±0.03 s)	0.74 s (±0.02 s)	1.00
multithreaded_benchmark Build Time	81.97 s	82.11 s	1.00 ❗
multithreaded_benchmark File Size	0.90 MB	0.86 MB	1.05 ❗
Multithreaded Pi Efficiency - 2 Threads	88.78 % (±6.77 %)	85.89 % (±6.61 %)	1.03
Multithreaded Pi Efficiency - 4 Threads	43.95 % (±2.62 %)	43.43 % (±2.56 %)	1.01
Multithreaded Pi Efficiency - 8 Threads	25.56 % (±1.05 %)	25.76 % (±1.53 %)	0.99
micro_benchmarks Build Time	81.08 s	80.40 s	1.01 ❗
micro_benchmarks File Size	0.90 MB	0.86 MB	1.05 ❗
Scheduling time - 1 thread	62.98 ticks (±2.10 ticks)	62.65 ticks (±4.06 ticks)	1.01
Scheduling time - 2 threads	35.92 ticks (±5.87 ticks)	34.08 ticks (±4.10 ticks)	1.05
Micro - Time for syscall (getpid)	3.38 ticks (±0.55 ticks)	3.45 ticks (±0.58 ticks)	0.98
Memcpy speed - (built_in) block size 4096	86287.79 MByte/s (±59747.76 MByte/s)	82448.38 MByte/s (±56997.13 MByte/s)	1.05
Memcpy speed - (built_in) block size 1048576	30708.53 MByte/s (±24720.74 MByte/s)	30585.98 MByte/s (±24707.84 MByte/s)	1.00
Memcpy speed - (built_in) block size 16777216	27492.34 MByte/s (±22612.07 MByte/s)	26340.06 MByte/s (±21720.96 MByte/s)	1.04
Memset speed - (built_in) block size 4096	86366.81 MByte/s (±59803.86 MByte/s)	82292.76 MByte/s (±56891.50 MByte/s)	1.05
Memset speed - (built_in) block size 1048576	31462.99 MByte/s (±25162.11 MByte/s)	31323.85 MByte/s (±25145.86 MByte/s)	1.00
Memset speed - (built_in) block size 16777216	28279.54 MByte/s (±23109.09 MByte/s)	27104.68 MByte/s (±22209.94 MByte/s)	1.04
Memcpy speed - (rust) block size 4096	76598.37 MByte/s (±53392.96 MByte/s)	74097.96 MByte/s (±51811.44 MByte/s)	1.03
Memcpy speed - (rust) block size 1048576	30587.48 MByte/s (±24681.34 MByte/s)	30361.60 MByte/s (±24602.37 MByte/s)	1.01
Memcpy speed - (rust) block size 16777216	27733.99 MByte/s (±22828.53 MByte/s)	27625.34 MByte/s (±22806.88 MByte/s)	1.00
Memset speed - (rust) block size 4096	76998.74 MByte/s (±53677.73 MByte/s)	74373.47 MByte/s (±51976.48 MByte/s)	1.04
Memset speed - (rust) block size 1048576	31328.79 MByte/s (±25116.22 MByte/s)	31110.89 MByte/s (±25033.24 MByte/s)	1.01
Memset speed - (rust) block size 16777216	28491.35 MByte/s (±23290.56 MByte/s)	28386.93 MByte/s (±23265.03 MByte/s)	1.00
alloc_benchmarks Build Time	75.73 s	74.76 s	1.01 ❗
alloc_benchmarks File Size	0.84 MB	0.87 MB	0.96 ❗
Allocations - Allocation success	91.31 %	91.31 %	1
Allocations - Deallocation success	100.00 %	100.00 %	1
Allocations - Pre-fail Allocations	61.44 %	61.44 %	1
Allocations - Average Allocation time	3082.47 Ticks (±215.36 Ticks)	5860.58 Ticks (±98.43 Ticks)	0.53 ❗
Allocations - Average Allocation time (no fail)	4057.06 Ticks (±184.36 Ticks)	6554.81 Ticks (±92.86 Ticks)	0.62 ❗
Allocations - Average Deallocation time	993.19 Ticks (±98.43 Ticks)	1805.01 Ticks (±250.35 Ticks)	0.55 ❗
mutex_benchmark Build Time	75.87 s	79.82 s	0.95 ❗
mutex_benchmark File Size	0.90 MB	0.86 MB	1.05 ❗
Mutex Stress Test Average Time per Iteration - 1 Threads	11.90 ns (±0.46 ns)	12.10 ns (±0.41 ns)	0.98
Mutex Stress Test Average Time per Iteration - 2 Threads	38.66 ns (±2.42 ns)	40.26 ns (±1.68 ns)	0.96

This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.

[github-actions]

LLM review

The changes introduce a caching mechanism for PCI BAR mappings using LazyCell, but there are potential correctness and safety issues to address.

[stlankes]

@cagatay-y @mkroening @jounathaen Sorry, this PR was my test if an LLM is able to support reviews. I am not sure, if this helps...

[cagatay-y]

Sorry, this PR was my test if an LLM is able to support reviews. I am not sure, if this helps...

I replied to the comments in case it is useful for the evaluation of the test :)