From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 18:08:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170106180829.GG22088@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0b9a1f70-58fe-69c2-87db-d7773cb6a68c@arm.com>
Hi Jean-Philippe,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 05:48:33PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 20/12/16 15:14, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Booting Linux on an ARM fastmodel containing an SMMU emulation results
> > in an unexpected I/O page fault from the legacy virtio-blk PCI device:
> >
> > [ 1.211721] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
> > [ 1.211800] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
> > [ 1.211880] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
> > [ 1.211959] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081002
> > [ 1.212075] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000000000000000
> > [ 1.212155] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
> > [ 1.212234] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
> > [ 1.212314] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
> > [ 1.212394] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081000
> > [ 1.212471] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000000000000000
> >
> > <system hangs failing to read partition table>
> >
> > This is because the virtio-blk is behind an SMMU, so we have consequently
> > swizzled its DMA ops and configured the SMMU to translate accesses. This
> > then requires the vring code to use the DMA API to establish translations,
> > otherwise all transactions will result in fatal faults and termination.
> >
> > Given that ARM-based systems only see an SMMU if one is really present
> > (the topology is all described by firmware tables such as device-tree or
> > IORT), then we can safely use the DMA API for all virtio devices.
>
> There is a problem with the platform block device on that same model.
> Since it's not behind the SMMU, the DMA ops fall back to swiotlb, which
> limits the number of mappings.
>
> It used to work with 4.9, but since 9491ae4 ("mm: don't cap request size
> based on read-ahead setting") unlocked read-ahead, we quickly run into
> the limit of swiotlb and panic:
>
> [ 5.382359] virtio-mmio 1c130000.virtio_block: swiotlb buffer is full
> (sz: 491520 bytes)
> [ 5.382452] virtio-mmio 1c130000.virtio_block: DMA: Out of SW-IOMMU
> space for 491520 bytes
> [ 5.382531] Kernel panic - not syncing: DMA: Random memory could be
> DMA written
> ...
> [ 5.383148] [<ffff0000083ad754>] swiotlb_map_page+0x194/0x1a0
> [ 5.383226] [<ffff000008096bb8>] __swiotlb_map_page+0x20/0x88
> [ 5.383320] [<ffff0000084bf738>] vring_map_one_sg.isra.1+0x70/0x88
> [ 5.383417] [<ffff0000084c04fc>] virtqueue_add_sgs+0x2ec/0x4e8
> [ 5.383505] [<ffff00000856d99c>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
> ...
> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
Oh, lovely!
> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>
> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
Couldn't the same issue potentially occur with a hardware IOMMU, where
we run out of IOVA space due to unlimited readahead? I think it might be
best to enforce a finite limit for virtio devices when the DMA API is in
use.
Do any drivers for physical (i.e. non-virtual) hardware make use of
unlimited readahead?
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 18:08:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170106180829.GG22088@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0b9a1f70-58fe-69c2-87db-d7773cb6a68c@arm.com>
Hi Jean-Philippe,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 05:48:33PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 20/12/16 15:14, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Booting Linux on an ARM fastmodel containing an SMMU emulation results
> > in an unexpected I/O page fault from the legacy virtio-blk PCI device:
> >
> > [ 1.211721] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
> > [ 1.211800] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
> > [ 1.211880] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
> > [ 1.211959] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081002
> > [ 1.212075] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000000000000000
> > [ 1.212155] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
> > [ 1.212234] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
> > [ 1.212314] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
> > [ 1.212394] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081000
> > [ 1.212471] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000000000000000
> >
> > <system hangs failing to read partition table>
> >
> > This is because the virtio-blk is behind an SMMU, so we have consequently
> > swizzled its DMA ops and configured the SMMU to translate accesses. This
> > then requires the vring code to use the DMA API to establish translations,
> > otherwise all transactions will result in fatal faults and termination.
> >
> > Given that ARM-based systems only see an SMMU if one is really present
> > (the topology is all described by firmware tables such as device-tree or
> > IORT), then we can safely use the DMA API for all virtio devices.
>
> There is a problem with the platform block device on that same model.
> Since it's not behind the SMMU, the DMA ops fall back to swiotlb, which
> limits the number of mappings.
>
> It used to work with 4.9, but since 9491ae4 ("mm: don't cap request size
> based on read-ahead setting") unlocked read-ahead, we quickly run into
> the limit of swiotlb and panic:
>
> [ 5.382359] virtio-mmio 1c130000.virtio_block: swiotlb buffer is full
> (sz: 491520 bytes)
> [ 5.382452] virtio-mmio 1c130000.virtio_block: DMA: Out of SW-IOMMU
> space for 491520 bytes
> [ 5.382531] Kernel panic - not syncing: DMA: Random memory could be
> DMA written
> ...
> [ 5.383148] [<ffff0000083ad754>] swiotlb_map_page+0x194/0x1a0
> [ 5.383226] [<ffff000008096bb8>] __swiotlb_map_page+0x20/0x88
> [ 5.383320] [<ffff0000084bf738>] vring_map_one_sg.isra.1+0x70/0x88
> [ 5.383417] [<ffff0000084c04fc>] virtqueue_add_sgs+0x2ec/0x4e8
> [ 5.383505] [<ffff00000856d99c>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
> ...
> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
Oh, lovely!
> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>
> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
Couldn't the same issue potentially occur with a hardware IOMMU, where
we run out of IOVA space due to unlimited readahead? I think it might be
best to enforce a finite limit for virtio devices when the DMA API is in
use.
Do any drivers for physical (i.e. non-virtual) hardware make use of
unlimited readahead?
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com>
Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 18:08:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170106180829.GG22088@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0b9a1f70-58fe-69c2-87db-d7773cb6a68c@arm.com>
Hi Jean-Philippe,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 05:48:33PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 20/12/16 15:14, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Booting Linux on an ARM fastmodel containing an SMMU emulation results
> > in an unexpected I/O page fault from the legacy virtio-blk PCI device:
> >
> > [ 1.211721] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
> > [ 1.211800] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
> > [ 1.211880] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
> > [ 1.211959] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081002
> > [ 1.212075] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000000000000000
> > [ 1.212155] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
> > [ 1.212234] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
> > [ 1.212314] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
> > [ 1.212394] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081000
> > [ 1.212471] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000000000000000
> >
> > <system hangs failing to read partition table>
> >
> > This is because the virtio-blk is behind an SMMU, so we have consequently
> > swizzled its DMA ops and configured the SMMU to translate accesses. This
> > then requires the vring code to use the DMA API to establish translations,
> > otherwise all transactions will result in fatal faults and termination.
> >
> > Given that ARM-based systems only see an SMMU if one is really present
> > (the topology is all described by firmware tables such as device-tree or
> > IORT), then we can safely use the DMA API for all virtio devices.
>
> There is a problem with the platform block device on that same model.
> Since it's not behind the SMMU, the DMA ops fall back to swiotlb, which
> limits the number of mappings.
>
> It used to work with 4.9, but since 9491ae4 ("mm: don't cap request size
> based on read-ahead setting") unlocked read-ahead, we quickly run into
> the limit of swiotlb and panic:
>
> [ 5.382359] virtio-mmio 1c130000.virtio_block: swiotlb buffer is full
> (sz: 491520 bytes)
> [ 5.382452] virtio-mmio 1c130000.virtio_block: DMA: Out of SW-IOMMU
> space for 491520 bytes
> [ 5.382531] Kernel panic - not syncing: DMA: Random memory could be
> DMA written
> ...
> [ 5.383148] [<ffff0000083ad754>] swiotlb_map_page+0x194/0x1a0
> [ 5.383226] [<ffff000008096bb8>] __swiotlb_map_page+0x20/0x88
> [ 5.383320] [<ffff0000084bf738>] vring_map_one_sg.isra.1+0x70/0x88
> [ 5.383417] [<ffff0000084c04fc>] virtqueue_add_sgs+0x2ec/0x4e8
> [ 5.383505] [<ffff00000856d99c>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
> ...
> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
Oh, lovely!
> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>
> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
Couldn't the same issue potentially occur with a hardware IOMMU, where
we run out of IOVA space due to unlimited readahead? I think it might be
best to enforce a finite limit for virtio devices when the DMA API is in
use.
Do any drivers for physical (i.e. non-virtual) hardware make use of
unlimited readahead?
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-06 18:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-20 15:14 [RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems Will Deacon
2016-12-20 15:14 ` Will Deacon
2016-12-20 15:14 ` Will Deacon
2016-12-20 16:50 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-12-20 16:50 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-12-20 16:50 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-01-06 17:48 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2017-01-06 17:48 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2017-01-06 17:48 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2017-01-06 18:08 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-01-06 18:08 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-06 18:08 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-06 18:32 ` Robin Murphy
2017-01-06 18:32 ` Robin Murphy
2017-01-06 18:32 ` Robin Murphy
2017-01-06 21:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-06 21:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-06 21:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-09 11:24 ` Robin Murphy
2017-01-09 11:24 ` Robin Murphy
2017-01-09 14:54 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-09 14:54 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-09 14:54 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-10 10:50 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2017-01-10 10:50 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2017-01-10 10:50 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2017-01-09 17:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-09 17:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-09 17:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-09 11:24 ` Robin Murphy
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=20170106180829.GG22088@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.