From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: <will@kernel.org>, <joro@8bytes.org>, <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Document MMU-700 erratum 2812531
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 08:44:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZGJTRc+LYFFX9Sw0@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a45be5e3-c605-f93a-f523-1bb1f6150986@arm.com>
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 08:23:54PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2023-05-10 19:31, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 11:12:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 04:38:44PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > >
> > > > To work around MMU-700 erratum 2812531 we need to ensure that certain
> > > > sequences of commands cannot be issued without an intervening sync. In
> > > > practice this falls out of our current command-batching machinery
> > > > anyway - each batch only contains a single type of invalidation command,
> > >
> > > Hmm. This doesn't apply to the user cache invalidation solution
> > > in my v2. A user cmdq could possibly mix different commands in
> > > a single batch if the driver isn't aware of such an errata. So,
> > > I think I'd need some twist when the host has a FORCE_SYNC flag
> > > in my v3.
> >
> > Just found that you unset the NESTING feature flag in PATCH-4
> > for this errata too. So, the solution in my v2 should be safe.
>
> For the short term at least - we will still need to come up with a more
> practical active mitigation sooner rather than later, since I imagine
> people are likely to be a bit miffed if nesting support lands in distros
> but still refuses to play at all on the newest shiniest hardware.
> Unfortunately all current versions of MMU-700 are affected (hence the
> unconditional nature of this patch), and some of those are going to
> found in production SoCs.
Okay. I will try adding a WAR function following the doc:
1. A Stage 1 Invalidation that is followed by a Stage 2 invalidation
2. A Configuration Invalidation that is followed by any TLB Invalidation
3. A Leaf invalidation that is followed by a Non-leaf invalidation
We don't need anything for (1) as a user CMDQ only has stage-1
invalidations. Adding a SYNC after every CFIG_CD(_ALL) should
work for (2). Then for (3), need to check the leaf bit between
two adjacent NH_VA/NH_VAA commands.
Thanks
Nic
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: <will@kernel.org>, <joro@8bytes.org>, <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Document MMU-700 erratum 2812531
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 08:44:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZGJTRc+LYFFX9Sw0@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a45be5e3-c605-f93a-f523-1bb1f6150986@arm.com>
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 08:23:54PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2023-05-10 19:31, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 11:12:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 04:38:44PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > >
> > > > To work around MMU-700 erratum 2812531 we need to ensure that certain
> > > > sequences of commands cannot be issued without an intervening sync. In
> > > > practice this falls out of our current command-batching machinery
> > > > anyway - each batch only contains a single type of invalidation command,
> > >
> > > Hmm. This doesn't apply to the user cache invalidation solution
> > > in my v2. A user cmdq could possibly mix different commands in
> > > a single batch if the driver isn't aware of such an errata. So,
> > > I think I'd need some twist when the host has a FORCE_SYNC flag
> > > in my v3.
> >
> > Just found that you unset the NESTING feature flag in PATCH-4
> > for this errata too. So, the solution in my v2 should be safe.
>
> For the short term at least - we will still need to come up with a more
> practical active mitigation sooner rather than later, since I imagine
> people are likely to be a bit miffed if nesting support lands in distros
> but still refuses to play at all on the newest shiniest hardware.
> Unfortunately all current versions of MMU-700 are affected (hence the
> unconditional nature of this patch), and some of those are going to
> found in production SoCs.
Okay. I will try adding a WAR function following the doc:
1. A Stage 1 Invalidation that is followed by a Stage 2 invalidation
2. A Configuration Invalidation that is followed by any TLB Invalidation
3. A Leaf invalidation that is followed by a Non-leaf invalidation
We don't need anything for (1) as a user CMDQ only has stage-1
invalidations. Adding a SYNC after every CFIG_CD(_ALL) should
work for (2). Then for (3), need to check the leaf bit between
two adjacent NH_VA/NH_VAA commands.
Thanks
Nic
_______________________________________________
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:[~2023-05-15 15:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-10 15:38 [PATCH 0/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Arm SMMU errata bits Robin Murphy
2023-05-10 15:38 ` [PATCH 1/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Work around MMU-600 erratum 1076982 Robin Murphy
2023-05-10 17:40 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-12 19:02 ` Robin Murphy
2023-05-18 0:53 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-18 0:53 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-10 15:38 ` [PATCH 2/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Document MMU-700 erratum 2812531 Robin Murphy
2023-05-10 18:12 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-10 18:31 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-12 19:23 ` Robin Murphy
2023-05-15 15:44 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2023-05-15 15:44 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-10 15:38 ` [PATCH 3/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add explicit feature for nesting Robin Murphy
2023-05-10 18:13 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-05-10 15:38 ` [PATCH 4/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Document nesting-related errata Robin Murphy
2023-05-10 18:37 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-06-08 21:36 ` [PATCH 0/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Arm SMMU errata bits Will Deacon
2023-06-08 21:36 ` Will Deacon
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=ZGJTRc+LYFFX9Sw0@Asurada-Nvidia \
--to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--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.