From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: <kevin.tian@intel.com>, <will@kernel.org>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
<suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
<dwmw2@infradead.org>, <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
<shuah@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 05/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID ioctl
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:10:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZsOKe10cOTCcHOIP@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240819173332.GM2032816@nvidia.com>
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 02:33:32PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 05:21:57PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
>
> > > Why not? The idev becomes linked to the viommu when the dev id is set
> >
> > > Unless we are also going to enforce the idev is always attached to a
> > > nested then I don't think we need to check it here.
> > >
> > > Things will definately not entirely work as expected if the vdev is
> > > directly attached to the s2 or a blocking, but it won't harm anything.
> >
> > My view is that, the moment there is a VIOMMU object, that must
> > be a nested IOMMU case, so there must be a nested hwpt. Blocking
> > domain would be a hwpt_nested too (vSTE=Abort) as we previously
> > concluded.
>
> I'm not sure other vendors can do that vSTE=Abort/Bypass thing though
> yet..
>
> > Then, in a nested case, it feels odd that an idev is attached to
> > an S2 hwpt..
> >
> > That being said, I think we can still do that with validations:
> > If idev->hwpt is nested, compare input viommu v.s idev->hwpt->viommu.
> > If idev->hwpt is paging, compare input viommu->hwpt v.s idev->hwpt.
>
> But again, if you don't contiguously validate those invariants in all
> the other attach paths it is sort of pointless to check them since the
> userspace can still violate things.
Hmm, would that be unsafe? I start to wonder if we should allow an
attach to viommu and put validations on that?
> > This complicates things overall especially with the VIRQ that has
> > involved interrupt context polling vdev_id, where semaphore/mutex
> > won't fit very well. Perhaps it would need a driver-level bottom
> > half routine to call those helpers with locks. I am glad that you
> > noticed the problem early.
>
> I think you have to show the xarray to the driver and the driver can
> use the spinlock to access it safely. Keeping it hidden in the core
> code is causing all these locking problems.
Yea, I just figured that out... You have been right. I was able to
get rid of the locking problem with invalidation API. But then irq
became a headache as drivers would only know the dev pointer, so
everything that the dev could convert to would be unsafe as it can
not grab the idev/viommu locks until it converts.
Thanks
Nicolin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-19 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-07 20:10 [PATCH v1 00/16] iommufd: Add VIOMMU infrastructure (Part-1) Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 01/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMUFD_OBJ_VIOMMU and IOMMU_VIOMMU_ALLOC ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-14 16:50 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 18:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 18:20 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 18:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 02/16] iommu: Pass in a viommu pointer to domain_alloc_user op Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 03/16] iommufd: Allow pt_id to carry viommu_id for IOMMU_HWPT_ALLOC Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 04/16] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_ALLOC test coverage Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 05/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-14 17:09 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-14 22:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 19:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 19:46 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 19:53 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 23:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-16 0:21 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 17:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:10 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2024-08-19 18:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 06/16] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID test coverage Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 07/16] iommufd/viommu: Add cache_invalidate for IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_DEFAULT Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 08/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_INVALIDATE ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 23:51 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 17:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 17:49 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 18:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:22 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 09/16] iommufd/viommu: Make iommufd_viommu_find_device a public API Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 10/16] iommufd/selftest: Add mock_viommu_invalidate_user op Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 11/16] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_TEST_OP_DEV_CHECK_CACHE test command Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 12/16] iommufd/selftest: Add coverage for IOMMU_VIOMMU_INVALIDATE ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 13/16] iommufd/viommu: Add iommufd_viommu_to_parent_domain helper Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 14/16] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Extract an __arm_smmu_cache_invalidate_user helper Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 15/16] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add viommu cache invalidation support Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-16 0:50 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 17:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:19 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 18:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:38 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 18:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:54 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 16/16] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Allow ATS for IOMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED 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=ZsOKe10cOTCcHOIP@Asurada-Nvidia \
--to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.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.