From: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] VT-d: parse ACPI "SoC Integrated Address Translation Cache Reporting Structure"s
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 12:29:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zjiw89WKvy6vJAPn@macbook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c70b250d-2ec4-4254-89cf-d3241dac0d35@suse.com>
On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 11:14:31AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> This is a prereq to us, in particular, respecting the "ATC required"
> flag.
>
> Note that ACPI_SATC_ATC_REQUIRED has its #define put in dmar.h, as we
> try to keep actbl*.h in sync what Linux (who in turn inherit from ACPI
> CA) has.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> ---
> Lovely: On the SPR system with the SATC I tried passing "ats" (the
> "required" flag is clear there), just to then hit "IOMMU#4: QI dev wait
> descriptor taking too long" while setting up Dom0. The 2nd message there
> doesn't ever appear, so the request never completes. Not sure whether
> that's us doing something wrong or the hardware acting up. In the former
> case I'd generally expect an IOMMU fault to be raised, though. FTR same
> on 4.18 with just "VT-d: correct ATS checking for root complex
> integrated devices" backported there.
Great, so we likely have a bug in our ATS implementation?
>
> Should we check scope entries for appropriate types? (If so, then also
> for e.g. ATSR.)
> ---
> v2: Move error case freeing to acpi_parse_one_satc(). Introduce #define
> for the flag bit. Style.
>
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
> @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ LIST_HEAD_READ_MOSTLY(acpi_drhd_units);
> LIST_HEAD_READ_MOSTLY(acpi_rmrr_units);
> static LIST_HEAD_READ_MOSTLY(acpi_atsr_units);
> static LIST_HEAD_READ_MOSTLY(acpi_rhsa_units);
> +static LIST_HEAD_READ_MOSTLY(acpi_satc_units);
We could even make this one RO after init.
>
> static struct acpi_table_header *__read_mostly dmar_table;
> static int __read_mostly dmar_flags;
> @@ -750,6 +751,93 @@ acpi_parse_one_rhsa(struct acpi_dmar_hea
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int __init register_one_satc(struct acpi_satc_unit *satcu)
> +{
> + bool ignore = false;
> + unsigned int i = 0;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + /* Skip checking if segment is not accessible yet. */
> + if ( !pci_known_segment(satcu->segment) )
> + i = UINT_MAX;
> +
> + for ( ; i < satcu->scope.devices_cnt; i++ )
> + {
> + uint8_t b = PCI_BUS(satcu->scope.devices[i]);
> + uint8_t d = PCI_SLOT(satcu->scope.devices[i]);
> + uint8_t f = PCI_FUNC(satcu->scope.devices[i]);
> +
> + if ( !pci_device_detect(satcu->segment, b, d, f) )
> + {
> + dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
> + " Non-existent device (%pp) is reported in SATC scope!\n",
> + &PCI_SBDF(satcu->segment, b, d, f));
> + ignore = true;
> + }
> + else
> + {
> + ignore = false;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if ( ignore )
> + {
> + dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
> + " Ignore SATC for seg %04x as no device under its scope is PCI discoverable\n",
> + satcu->segment);
Re the error messages: won't it be better to print them using plain
printk and gate on iommu_verbose being enabled if anything?
It does seem a bit odd that such messages won't be printed when
iommu={debug,verbose} is enabled on the command line.
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + if ( iommu_verbose )
> + printk(VTDPREFIX " ATC required: %d\n", satcu->atc_required);
> +
> + list_add(&satcu->list, &acpi_satc_units);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init
> +acpi_parse_one_satc(const struct acpi_dmar_header *header)
> +{
> + const struct acpi_dmar_satc *satc =
> + container_of(header, const struct acpi_dmar_satc, header);
> + struct acpi_satc_unit *satcu;
> + const void *dev_scope_start, *dev_scope_end;
> + int ret = acpi_dmar_check_length(header, sizeof(*satc));
> +
> + if ( ret )
> + return ret;
> +
> + satcu = xzalloc(struct acpi_satc_unit);
> + if ( !satcu )
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + satcu->segment = satc->segment;
> + satcu->atc_required = satc->flags & ACPI_SATC_ATC_REQUIRED;
> +
> + dev_scope_start = (const void *)(satc + 1);
> + dev_scope_end = (const void *)satc + header->length;
Isn't it enough to just cast to void * and inherit the const from the
left side variable declaration?
You could even initialize dev_scope_{start,end} at definition.
Thanks, Roger.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-06 10:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-15 10:11 [PATCH v2 00/12] VT-d: SATC handling; ATS: tidying Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:13 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] VT-d: correct ATS checking for root complex integrated devices Jan Beulich
2024-05-03 14:01 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-02-15 10:14 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] VT-d: tidy error handling of RMRR parsing Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 9:12 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-06 9:21 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 9:26 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-02-15 10:14 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] VT-d: parse ACPI "SoC Integrated Address Translation Cache Reporting Structure"s Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 10:29 ` Roger Pau Monné [this message]
2024-05-06 11:01 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 11:09 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-02-15 10:15 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] AMD/IOMMU: add helper to check whether ATS is to be used for a device Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 11:27 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-02-15 10:15 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] IOMMU: rename and re-type ats_enabled Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:21 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 12:42 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-06 13:20 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 13:53 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-15 10:07 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-20 10:29 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-21 6:21 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-21 10:03 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-21 10:23 ` Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] VT-d: respect ACPI SATC's ATC_REQUIRED flag Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 13:38 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-15 10:42 ` Jan Beulich
2024-05-20 11:36 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-05-21 6:25 ` Jan Beulich
2025-10-23 13:30 ` Teddy Astie
2025-10-27 11:23 ` Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] VT-d: replace find_ats_dev_drhd() Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:17 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] VT-d: move ats_device() to the sole file it's used from Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:18 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] VT-d: move dev_invalidate_iotlb() " Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:18 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] VT-d: move {,un}map_vtd_domain_page() Jan Beulich
2024-02-15 10:18 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] VT-d: drop flush_dev_iotlb parameter from IOTLB flush hook Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 14:06 ` Roger Pau Monné
2024-02-15 10:19 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] PCI/ATS: tidy {en,dis}able_ats_device() a little Jan Beulich
2024-05-06 14:10 ` Roger Pau Monné
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=Zjiw89WKvy6vJAPn@macbook \
--to=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=paul@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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.