From: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: stable@kernel.vger.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about domain_init (v5.3-v5.7)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:48:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877dq7grzq.fsf@jsnitsel.users.ipa.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <72a7b338-2481-8c0a-5641-6f448557f6ee@linux.intel.com>
Lu Baolu @ 2020-11-26 19:12 MST:
> Hi Jerry,
>
> On 11/27/20 5:35 AM, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>> Lu Baolu @ 2020-11-26 04:01 MST:
>>
>>> Hi Jerry,
>>>
>>> On 2020/11/26 4:27, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>>>> Is there a reason we check the requested guest address width against
>>>> the
>>>> iommu's mgaw, instead of the agaw that we already know for the iommu?
>>>> I've run into a case with a new system where the mgaw reported is 57,
>>>> but if they set PAE to 46 instead of 52 in the bios, then sagaw reports
>>>> the highest supported agaw is 48 and the domain_init code fails here. In
>>>
>>> Isn't this a platform bug? If it's too late to fix it in the BIOS, you
>>> maybe have to add a platform specific quirk to set mgaw to the highest
>>> supported agaw?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> baolu
>> Is there somewhere you can point me to that discusses how they
>> should be
>> setting the mgaw? I misunderstood when I previously asked you about
>> whether the mgaw could be a value that was greater than any of sagaw.
>> If it is a bios issue, then they should fix it there.
>
> MGAW indicates the max gpa width supported by 2nd translation. The VT-d
> spec requires that this value must be at least equal to the host
> physical addressibility. According to this, BIOS is good, right?
>
Yes, the host address width is 46. MGAW reports 57 (56+1), and highest
sagaw bit is for 48.
> For this failure case, domain_init() just wants to find a suitable agaw
> for the private domain. I think it makes sense to check against
> iommu->agaw instead of cap_mgaw.
>
> Best regards,
> baolu
>
>>
>>>
>>>> other places like prepare_domain_attach_device, the dmar domain agaw
>>>> gets adjusted down to the iommu agaw. The agaw of the iommu gets
>>>> determined based off what is reported for sagaw. I'm wondering if it
>>>> can't instead do:
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 4 ++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> index 6ca5c92ef2e5..a8e41ec36d9e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> @@ -1862,8 +1862,8 @@ static int domain_init(struct dmar_domain *domain, struct intel_iommu *iommu,
>>>> domain_reserve_special_ranges(domain);
>>>> /* calculate AGAW */
>>>> - if (guest_width > cap_mgaw(iommu->cap))
>>>> - guest_width = cap_mgaw(iommu->cap);
>>>> + if (guest_width > agaw_to_width(iommu->agaw))
>>>> + guest_width = agaw_to_width(iommu->agaw);
>>>> domain->gaw = guest_width;
>>>> adjust_width = guestwidth_to_adjustwidth(guest_width);
>>>> agaw = width_to_agaw(adjust_width);
>>>> --
>>>> 2.27.0
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts? With the former code the ehci device for the ilo fails when
>>>> trying to get a private domain.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jerry
>>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@kernel.vger.org
Subject: Re: Question about domain_init (v5.3-v5.7)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:48:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877dq7grzq.fsf@jsnitsel.users.ipa.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <72a7b338-2481-8c0a-5641-6f448557f6ee@linux.intel.com>
Lu Baolu @ 2020-11-26 19:12 MST:
> Hi Jerry,
>
> On 11/27/20 5:35 AM, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>> Lu Baolu @ 2020-11-26 04:01 MST:
>>
>>> Hi Jerry,
>>>
>>> On 2020/11/26 4:27, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>>>> Is there a reason we check the requested guest address width against
>>>> the
>>>> iommu's mgaw, instead of the agaw that we already know for the iommu?
>>>> I've run into a case with a new system where the mgaw reported is 57,
>>>> but if they set PAE to 46 instead of 52 in the bios, then sagaw reports
>>>> the highest supported agaw is 48 and the domain_init code fails here. In
>>>
>>> Isn't this a platform bug? If it's too late to fix it in the BIOS, you
>>> maybe have to add a platform specific quirk to set mgaw to the highest
>>> supported agaw?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> baolu
>> Is there somewhere you can point me to that discusses how they
>> should be
>> setting the mgaw? I misunderstood when I previously asked you about
>> whether the mgaw could be a value that was greater than any of sagaw.
>> If it is a bios issue, then they should fix it there.
>
> MGAW indicates the max gpa width supported by 2nd translation. The VT-d
> spec requires that this value must be at least equal to the host
> physical addressibility. According to this, BIOS is good, right?
>
Yes, the host address width is 46. MGAW reports 57 (56+1), and highest
sagaw bit is for 48.
> For this failure case, domain_init() just wants to find a suitable agaw
> for the private domain. I think it makes sense to check against
> iommu->agaw instead of cap_mgaw.
>
> Best regards,
> baolu
>
>>
>>>
>>>> other places like prepare_domain_attach_device, the dmar domain agaw
>>>> gets adjusted down to the iommu agaw. The agaw of the iommu gets
>>>> determined based off what is reported for sagaw. I'm wondering if it
>>>> can't instead do:
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 4 ++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> index 6ca5c92ef2e5..a8e41ec36d9e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
>>>> @@ -1862,8 +1862,8 @@ static int domain_init(struct dmar_domain *domain, struct intel_iommu *iommu,
>>>> domain_reserve_special_ranges(domain);
>>>> /* calculate AGAW */
>>>> - if (guest_width > cap_mgaw(iommu->cap))
>>>> - guest_width = cap_mgaw(iommu->cap);
>>>> + if (guest_width > agaw_to_width(iommu->agaw))
>>>> + guest_width = agaw_to_width(iommu->agaw);
>>>> domain->gaw = guest_width;
>>>> adjust_width = guestwidth_to_adjustwidth(guest_width);
>>>> agaw = width_to_agaw(adjust_width);
>>>> --
>>>> 2.27.0
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts? With the former code the ehci device for the ilo fails when
>>>> trying to get a private domain.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jerry
>>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-27 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-25 20:27 Question about domain_init (v5.3-v5.7) Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-25 20:27 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-26 11:01 ` Lu Baolu
2020-11-26 11:01 ` Lu Baolu
2020-11-26 21:35 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-26 21:35 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-27 2:12 ` Lu Baolu
2020-11-27 2:12 ` Lu Baolu
2020-11-27 7:48 ` Jerry Snitselaar [this message]
2020-11-27 7:48 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-30 17:50 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-30 17:50 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-30 18:03 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-11-30 18:03 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-12-01 2:37 ` Lu Baolu
2020-12-01 2:37 ` Lu Baolu
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=877dq7grzq.fsf@jsnitsel.users.ipa.redhat.com \
--to=jsnitsel@redhat.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@kernel.vger.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.