From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, joro@8bytes.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
will@kernel.org, nicolinc@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make STE programming independent of the callers
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:10:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240110131032.GA535328@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240106083617.1173871-1-mshavit@google.com>
On Sat, Jan 06, 2024 at 04:36:14PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> +/*
> + * Update the STE/CD to the target configuration. The transition from the current
> + * entry to the target entry takes place over multiple steps that attempts to make
> + * the transition hitless if possible. This function takes care not to create a
> + * situation where the HW can perceive a corrupted entry. HW is only required to
> + * have a 64 bit atomicity with stores from the CPU, while entries are many 64
> + * bit values big.
> + *
> + * The algorithm works by evolving the entry toward the target in a series of
> + * steps. Each step synchronizes with the HW so that the HW can not see an entry
> + * torn across two steps. During each step the HW can observe a torn entry that
> + * has any combination of the step's old/new 64 bit words. The algorithm
> + * objective is for the HW behavior to always be one of current behavior, V=0,
> + * or new behavior.
> + *
> + * In the most general case we can make any update in three steps:
> + * - Disrupting the entry (V=0)
> + * - Fill now unused bits, all bits except V
> + * - Make valid (V=1), single 64 bit store
> + *
> + * However this disrupts the HW while it is happening. There are several
> + * interesting cases where a STE/CD can be updated without disturbing the HW
> + * because only a small number of bits are changing (S1DSS, CONFIG, etc) or
> + * because the used bits don't intersect. We can detect this by calculating how
> + * many 64 bit values need update after adjusting the unused bits and skip the
> + * V=0 process. This relies on the IGNORED behavior described in the
> + * specification
> + */
I edited this a bit more:
/*
* Update the STE/CD to the target configuration. The transition from the
* current entry to the target entry takes place over multiple steps that
* attempts to make the transition hitless if possible. This function takes care
* not to create a situation where the HW can perceive a corrupted entry. HW is
* only required to have a 64 bit atomicity with stores from the CPU, while
* entries are many 64 bit values big.
*
* The difference between the current value and the target value is analyzed to
* determine which of three updates are required - disruptive, hitless or no
* change.
*
* In the most general disruptive case we can make any update in three steps:
* - Disrupting the entry (V=0)
* - Fill now unused qwords, execpt qword 0 which contains V
* - Make qword 0 have the final value and valid (V=1) with a single 64
* bit store
*
* However this disrupts the HW while it is happening. There are several
* interesting cases where a STE/CD can be updated without disturbing the HW
* because only a small number of bits are changing (S1DSS, CONFIG, etc) or
* because the used bits don't intersect. We can detect this by calculating how
* many 64 bit values need update after adjusting the unused bits and skip the
* V=0 process. This relies on the IGNORED behavior described in the
* specification.
*/
> +void arm_smmu_write_entry(const struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops *ops,
> + __le64 *entry, const __le64 *target)
> +{
> + __le64 unused_update[NUM_ENTRY_QWORDS];
> + u8 used_qword_diff;
> + unsigned int critical_qword_index;
> +
> + used_qword_diff = compute_qword_diff(ops, entry, target, unused_update);
> + if (hweight8(used_qword_diff) > 1) {
> + /*
> + * At least two qwords need their used bits to be changed. This
> + * requires a breaking update, zero the V bit, write all qwords
> + * but 0, then set qword 0
> + */
> + unused_update[0] = entry[0] & (~ops->v_bit);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, unused_update, 0, 1);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, 1, ops->num_entry_qwords - 1);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, 0, 1);
> + } else if (hweight8(used_qword_diff) == 1) {
> + /*
> + * Only one qword needs its used bits to be changed. This is a
> + * hitless update, update all bits the current STE is ignoring
> + * to their new values, then update a single qword to change the
> + * STE and finally 0 out any bits that are now unused in the
> + * target configuration.
> + */
> + critical_qword_index = ffs(used_qword_diff) - 1;
> + /*
> + * Skip writing unused bits in the critical qword since we'll be
> + * writing it in the next step anyways. This can save a sync
> + * when the only change is in that qword.
> + */
> + unused_update[critical_qword_index] = entry[critical_qword_index];
Oh that is a neat improvement!
> + entry_set(ops, entry, unused_update, 0, ops->num_entry_qwords);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, critical_qword_index, 1);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, 0, ops->num_entry_qwords);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * If everything is working properly this shouldn't do anything
> + * as unused bits should always be 0 and thus can't change.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(entry_set(ops, entry, target, 0,
> + ops->num_entry_qwords));
> + }
> +}
> +
> +#undef NUM_ENTRY_QWORDS
It is fine the keep the constant, it is reasonably named.
> +struct arm_smmu_ste_writer {
> + struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops ops;
> + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
> + u32 sid;
> +};
I think the security focused people will not be totally happy with writable
function pointers..
So I changed it into:
struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops;
struct arm_smmu_entry_writer {
const struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops *ops;
struct arm_smmu_master *master;
};
struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops {
unsigned int num_entry_qwords;
__le64 v_bit;
void (*get_used)(struct arm_smmu_entry_writer *writer, const __le64 *entry,
__le64 *used);
void (*sync)(struct arm_smmu_entry_writer *writer);
};
(both ste and cd can use the master)
Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, joro@8bytes.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
will@kernel.org, nicolinc@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make STE programming independent of the callers
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:10:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240110131032.GA535328@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240106083617.1173871-1-mshavit@google.com>
On Sat, Jan 06, 2024 at 04:36:14PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> +/*
> + * Update the STE/CD to the target configuration. The transition from the current
> + * entry to the target entry takes place over multiple steps that attempts to make
> + * the transition hitless if possible. This function takes care not to create a
> + * situation where the HW can perceive a corrupted entry. HW is only required to
> + * have a 64 bit atomicity with stores from the CPU, while entries are many 64
> + * bit values big.
> + *
> + * The algorithm works by evolving the entry toward the target in a series of
> + * steps. Each step synchronizes with the HW so that the HW can not see an entry
> + * torn across two steps. During each step the HW can observe a torn entry that
> + * has any combination of the step's old/new 64 bit words. The algorithm
> + * objective is for the HW behavior to always be one of current behavior, V=0,
> + * or new behavior.
> + *
> + * In the most general case we can make any update in three steps:
> + * - Disrupting the entry (V=0)
> + * - Fill now unused bits, all bits except V
> + * - Make valid (V=1), single 64 bit store
> + *
> + * However this disrupts the HW while it is happening. There are several
> + * interesting cases where a STE/CD can be updated without disturbing the HW
> + * because only a small number of bits are changing (S1DSS, CONFIG, etc) or
> + * because the used bits don't intersect. We can detect this by calculating how
> + * many 64 bit values need update after adjusting the unused bits and skip the
> + * V=0 process. This relies on the IGNORED behavior described in the
> + * specification
> + */
I edited this a bit more:
/*
* Update the STE/CD to the target configuration. The transition from the
* current entry to the target entry takes place over multiple steps that
* attempts to make the transition hitless if possible. This function takes care
* not to create a situation where the HW can perceive a corrupted entry. HW is
* only required to have a 64 bit atomicity with stores from the CPU, while
* entries are many 64 bit values big.
*
* The difference between the current value and the target value is analyzed to
* determine which of three updates are required - disruptive, hitless or no
* change.
*
* In the most general disruptive case we can make any update in three steps:
* - Disrupting the entry (V=0)
* - Fill now unused qwords, execpt qword 0 which contains V
* - Make qword 0 have the final value and valid (V=1) with a single 64
* bit store
*
* However this disrupts the HW while it is happening. There are several
* interesting cases where a STE/CD can be updated without disturbing the HW
* because only a small number of bits are changing (S1DSS, CONFIG, etc) or
* because the used bits don't intersect. We can detect this by calculating how
* many 64 bit values need update after adjusting the unused bits and skip the
* V=0 process. This relies on the IGNORED behavior described in the
* specification.
*/
> +void arm_smmu_write_entry(const struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops *ops,
> + __le64 *entry, const __le64 *target)
> +{
> + __le64 unused_update[NUM_ENTRY_QWORDS];
> + u8 used_qword_diff;
> + unsigned int critical_qword_index;
> +
> + used_qword_diff = compute_qword_diff(ops, entry, target, unused_update);
> + if (hweight8(used_qword_diff) > 1) {
> + /*
> + * At least two qwords need their used bits to be changed. This
> + * requires a breaking update, zero the V bit, write all qwords
> + * but 0, then set qword 0
> + */
> + unused_update[0] = entry[0] & (~ops->v_bit);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, unused_update, 0, 1);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, 1, ops->num_entry_qwords - 1);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, 0, 1);
> + } else if (hweight8(used_qword_diff) == 1) {
> + /*
> + * Only one qword needs its used bits to be changed. This is a
> + * hitless update, update all bits the current STE is ignoring
> + * to their new values, then update a single qword to change the
> + * STE and finally 0 out any bits that are now unused in the
> + * target configuration.
> + */
> + critical_qword_index = ffs(used_qword_diff) - 1;
> + /*
> + * Skip writing unused bits in the critical qword since we'll be
> + * writing it in the next step anyways. This can save a sync
> + * when the only change is in that qword.
> + */
> + unused_update[critical_qword_index] = entry[critical_qword_index];
Oh that is a neat improvement!
> + entry_set(ops, entry, unused_update, 0, ops->num_entry_qwords);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, critical_qword_index, 1);
> + entry_set(ops, entry, target, 0, ops->num_entry_qwords);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * If everything is working properly this shouldn't do anything
> + * as unused bits should always be 0 and thus can't change.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(entry_set(ops, entry, target, 0,
> + ops->num_entry_qwords));
> + }
> +}
> +
> +#undef NUM_ENTRY_QWORDS
It is fine the keep the constant, it is reasonably named.
> +struct arm_smmu_ste_writer {
> + struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops ops;
> + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
> + u32 sid;
> +};
I think the security focused people will not be totally happy with writable
function pointers..
So I changed it into:
struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops;
struct arm_smmu_entry_writer {
const struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops *ops;
struct arm_smmu_master *master;
};
struct arm_smmu_entry_writer_ops {
unsigned int num_entry_qwords;
__le64 v_bit;
void (*get_used)(struct arm_smmu_entry_writer *writer, const __le64 *entry,
__le64 *used);
void (*sync)(struct arm_smmu_entry_writer *writer);
};
(both ste and cd can use the master)
Jason
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-10 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 134+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-11 0:33 [PATCH 00/19] Update SMMUv3 to the modern iommu API (part 1/2) Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 01/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add a type for the STE Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-13 10:37 ` Will Deacon
2023-10-13 10:37 ` Will Deacon
2023-10-13 14:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-13 14:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 02/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Master cannot be NULL in arm_smmu_write_strtab_ent() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 03/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Remove ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 04/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make STE programming independent of the callers Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-12 8:10 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-12 8:10 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-12 12:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-12 12:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-18 11:05 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-18 11:05 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-18 13:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-18 13:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-20 8:23 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-20 8:23 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-20 11:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-20 11:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-23 8:36 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-23 8:36 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-23 12:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-23 12:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-15 20:26 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-15 20:26 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-17 13:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-17 13:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-18 12:35 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-18 12:35 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-18 12:42 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-18 12:42 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-19 13:42 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-19 13:42 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-25 12:17 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-25 12:17 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-25 12:58 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-25 12:58 ` Michael Shavit
2023-12-27 15:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-27 15:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-27 15:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-27 15:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-02 8:08 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-02 8:08 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-02 14:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-02 14:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-03 16:52 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-03 16:52 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-03 17:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-03 17:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-06 8:36 ` [PATCH] " Michael Shavit
2024-01-06 8:36 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-06 8:36 ` [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry_step() Michael Shavit
2024-01-06 8:36 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-10 13:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-10 13:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-06 8:36 ` [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry Michael Shavit
2024-01-06 8:36 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-12 16:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-12 16:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-16 9:23 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-16 9:23 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-10 13:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2024-01-10 13:10 ` [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make STE programming independent of the callers Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-06 8:50 ` [PATCH 04/19] " Michael Shavit
2024-01-06 8:50 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-12 19:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-12 19:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-03 15:42 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-03 15:42 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-03 15:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-03 15:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-03 16:47 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-03 16:47 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-02 8:13 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-02 8:13 ` Michael Shavit
2024-01-02 14:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-01-02 14:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-18 10:54 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-18 10:54 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-18 12:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-18 12:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-19 23:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-19 23:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 05/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Consolidate the STE generation for abort/bypass Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 06/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move arm_smmu_rmr_install_bypass_ste() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 07/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move the STE generation for S1 and S2 domains into functions Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 08/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Build the whole STE in arm_smmu_make_s2_domain_ste() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 09/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Hold arm_smmu_asid_lock during all of attach_dev Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-24 2:44 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-24 2:44 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-24 2:48 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-24 2:48 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-24 11:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-24 11:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 10/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Compute the STE only once for each master Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 11/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Do not change the STE twice during arm_smmu_attach_dev() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 12/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Put writing the context descriptor in the right order Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-12 9:01 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-12 9:01 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-12 12:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-12 12:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 13/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pass smmu_domain to arm_enable/disable_ats() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 14/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Remove arm_smmu_master->domain Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 15/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add a global static IDENTITY domain Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-18 11:06 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-18 11:06 ` Michael Shavit
2023-10-18 12:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-18 12:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 16/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add a global static BLOCKED domain Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 17/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use the identity/blocked domain during release Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 18/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pass arm_smmu_domain and arm_smmu_device to finalize Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` [PATCH 19/19] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Convert to domain_alloc_paging() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-11 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=20240110131032.GA535328@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mshavit@google.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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.