From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: <will@kernel.org>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
<thierry.reding@gmail.com>, <vdumpa@nvidia.com>,
<jonathanh@nvidia.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/6] iommu/tegra241-cmdqv: Limit CMDs for guest owned VINTF
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 15:20:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZkPjqDJvkXc84At3@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZkOAAdugARILEeBh@nvidia.com>
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:15:13PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 03:09:25PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > > -static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> > > > +static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *
> > > > +arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u8 opcode)
> > > > {
> > > > if (arm_smmu_has_tegra241_cmdqv(smmu))
> > > > - return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu);
> > > > + return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu, opcode);
> > >
> > > It is worth a comment descrbing opcode here, I think.. At least the
> > > nesting invalidation will send mixed batches.
> >
> > Right, this makes the "opcode" look bad, though we know that the
> > "opcode" in the nesting invalidation doesn't matter because VCMDQ
> > in that case supports all commands with HYP_OWN=1.
>
> Yeah, it isn't a real problem, it just looks a little messy and
> should have a small comment someplace at least..
>
> > A CMD_SYNC, on the other hand, is outside the batch struct. And
> > here is another assumption that CMD_SYNC is always supported by a
> > VCMDQ..
> >
> > I could clarify the "opcode" here with these assumptions. Or maybe
> > we should think think of a better alternative?
>
> I don't think it really needs to be more complex, but we should
> document that invalidation is going to be special and doesn't quite
> follow this rule.
Yea. I just added this:
@@ -333,10 +333,22 @@ static int arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd(u64 *cmd, struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent *ent)
return 0;
}
-static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
+static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *
+arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u8 opcode)
{
+ /*
+ * TEGRA241 CMDQV has two modes to execute commands: host and guest.
+ * The host mode supports all the opcodes, while the guest mode only
+ * supports a few invalidation ones (check tegra241_vintf_support_cmd)
+ * and also a CMD_SYNC added by arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist(..., true).
+ *
+ * Here pass in the representing opcode for either a single command or
+ * an arm_smmu_cmdq_batch, assuming that this SMMU driver will only add
+ * same type of commands into a batch as it does today or it will only
+ * mix supported invalidation commands in a batch.
+ */
if (arm_smmu_has_tegra241_cmdqv(smmu))
- return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu);
+ return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu, opcode);
return &smmu->cmdq;
}
Thanks
Nicolin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: <will@kernel.org>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
<thierry.reding@gmail.com>, <vdumpa@nvidia.com>,
<jonathanh@nvidia.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/6] iommu/tegra241-cmdqv: Limit CMDs for guest owned VINTF
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 15:20:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZkPjqDJvkXc84At3@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZkOAAdugARILEeBh@nvidia.com>
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:15:13PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 03:09:25PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > > -static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> > > > +static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *
> > > > +arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u8 opcode)
> > > > {
> > > > if (arm_smmu_has_tegra241_cmdqv(smmu))
> > > > - return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu);
> > > > + return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu, opcode);
> > >
> > > It is worth a comment descrbing opcode here, I think.. At least the
> > > nesting invalidation will send mixed batches.
> >
> > Right, this makes the "opcode" look bad, though we know that the
> > "opcode" in the nesting invalidation doesn't matter because VCMDQ
> > in that case supports all commands with HYP_OWN=1.
>
> Yeah, it isn't a real problem, it just looks a little messy and
> should have a small comment someplace at least..
>
> > A CMD_SYNC, on the other hand, is outside the batch struct. And
> > here is another assumption that CMD_SYNC is always supported by a
> > VCMDQ..
> >
> > I could clarify the "opcode" here with these assumptions. Or maybe
> > we should think think of a better alternative?
>
> I don't think it really needs to be more complex, but we should
> document that invalidation is going to be special and doesn't quite
> follow this rule.
Yea. I just added this:
@@ -333,10 +333,22 @@ static int arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd(u64 *cmd, struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent *ent)
return 0;
}
-static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
+static struct arm_smmu_cmdq *
+arm_smmu_get_cmdq(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u8 opcode)
{
+ /*
+ * TEGRA241 CMDQV has two modes to execute commands: host and guest.
+ * The host mode supports all the opcodes, while the guest mode only
+ * supports a few invalidation ones (check tegra241_vintf_support_cmd)
+ * and also a CMD_SYNC added by arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist(..., true).
+ *
+ * Here pass in the representing opcode for either a single command or
+ * an arm_smmu_cmdq_batch, assuming that this SMMU driver will only add
+ * same type of commands into a batch as it does today or it will only
+ * mix supported invalidation commands in a batch.
+ */
if (arm_smmu_has_tegra241_cmdqv(smmu))
- return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu);
+ return tegra241_cmdqv_get_cmdq(smmu, opcode);
return &smmu->cmdq;
}
Thanks
Nicolin
_______________________________________________
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:[~2024-05-14 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-08 5:56 [PATCH v7 0/6] Add Tegra241 (Grace) CMDQV Support (part 1/2) Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` [PATCH v7 1/6] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make symbols public for CONFIG_TEGRA241_CMDQV Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` [PATCH v7 2/6] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Issue a batch of commands to the same cmdq Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 15:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 15:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-08 5:56 ` [PATCH v7 3/6] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Enforce arm_smmu_cmdq_build_sync_cmd Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 15:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 15:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 20:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 20:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` [PATCH v7 4/6] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add CS_NONE quirk for CONFIG_TEGRA241_CMDQV Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` [PATCH v7 5/6] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add in-kernel support for NVIDIA Tegra241 (Grace) CMDQV Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 15:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 15:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 21:00 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 21:00 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` [PATCH v7 6/6] iommu/tegra241-cmdqv: Limit CMDs for guest owned VINTF Nicolin Chen
2024-05-08 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 16:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 16:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-12 22:09 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-12 22:09 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-14 15:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-14 15:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-14 22:20 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2024-05-14 22:20 ` Nicolin Chen
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=ZkPjqDJvkXc84At3@nvidia.com \
--to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=vdumpa@nvidia.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.