From: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Daniel Mentz <danielmentz@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce struct arm_smmu_event
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:08:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZyTu6tNO8gaSqKSy@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7c7b905c-ee00-4333-987e-0d0f0e45753f@arm.com>
On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 02:41:07PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2024-10-18 7:00 pm, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > Introduce `struct arm_smmu_event` to represent event records.
> > Parse out relevant fields from raw event records for ease and
> > use the new `struct arm_smmu_event` instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Mentz <danielmentz@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 59 ++++++++++++++-------
> > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 20 +++++++
> > 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> > index 737c5b882355..2f1108e5de51 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> > @@ -1757,17 +1757,16 @@ arm_smmu_find_master(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u32 sid)
> > }
> > /* IRQ and event handlers */
> > -static int arm_smmu_handle_evt(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u64 *evt)
> > +static int arm_smmu_handle_evt(struct arm_smmu_event *event)
> > {
> > int ret = 0;
> > u32 perm = 0;
> > struct arm_smmu_master *master;
> > - bool ssid_valid = evt[0] & EVTQ_0_SSV;
> > - u32 sid = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_SID, evt[0]);
> > struct iopf_fault fault_evt = { };
> > + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = event->smmu;
> > struct iommu_fault *flt = &fault_evt.fault;
> > - switch (FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_ID, evt[0])) {
> > + switch (event->id) {
> > case EVT_ID_TRANSLATION_FAULT:
> > case EVT_ID_ADDR_SIZE_FAULT:
> > case EVT_ID_ACCESS_FAULT:
> > @@ -1777,35 +1776,35 @@ static int arm_smmu_handle_evt(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u64 *evt)
> > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > }
> > - if (!(evt[1] & EVTQ_1_STALL))
> > + if (!event->stall)
> > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > - if (evt[1] & EVTQ_1_RnW)
> > + if (event->read)
> > perm |= IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_READ;
> > else
> > perm |= IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_WRITE;
> > - if (evt[1] & EVTQ_1_InD)
> > + if (event->instruction)
> > perm |= IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_EXEC;
> > - if (evt[1] & EVTQ_1_PnU)
> > + if (event->privileged)
> > perm |= IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_PRIV;
> > flt->type = IOMMU_FAULT_PAGE_REQ;
> > flt->prm = (struct iommu_fault_page_request) {
> > .flags = IOMMU_FAULT_PAGE_REQUEST_LAST_PAGE,
> > - .grpid = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_STAG, evt[1]),
> > + .grpid = event->stag,
> > .perm = perm,
> > - .addr = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_2_ADDR, evt[2]),
> > + .addr = event->iova,
> > };
> > - if (ssid_valid) {
> > + if (event->ssid_valid) {
> > flt->prm.flags |= IOMMU_FAULT_PAGE_REQUEST_PASID_VALID;
> > - flt->prm.pasid = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_SSID, evt[0]);
> > + flt->prm.pasid = event->ssid;
> > }
> > mutex_lock(&smmu->streams_mutex);
> > - master = arm_smmu_find_master(smmu, sid);
> > + master = arm_smmu_find_master(smmu, event->sid);
> > if (!master) {
> > ret = -EINVAL;
> > goto out_unlock;
> > @@ -1817,28 +1816,48 @@ static int arm_smmu_handle_evt(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u64 *evt)
> > return ret;
> > }
> > +static void arm_smmu_get_event_from_raw(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu,
> > + struct arm_smmu_event *event)
>
> One would kind of expect "get event from raw" to take a raw thing and return
> an event... personally I'd still just inline this in arm_smmu_handle_evt()
Hmm.. I think we can do both of those things.
We can kzalloc struct arm_smmu_event and return it, that should also
reduce the stack size. However, I'm unsure if that'd slow things down
because kzalloc may be a little more expensive than a local variable..
For the inlining, just to ensure I understand, we're looking to keep the
old arm_smmu_handle_evt(smmu, raw_evt) as is and then decode the event
within arm_smmu_handle_evt before we start handling it, right?
I'm fine with both of the suggestions above, let me know your vote?
> itself, but otherwise something like arm_smmu_decode_evt() would seem a more
> logical and obvious name at this point.
>
> > +{
> > + /* Pick out the good stuff */
> > + event->id = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_ID, event->raw[0]);
> > + event->sid = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_SID, event->raw[0]);
> > + event->ssid_valid = event->raw[0] & EVTQ_0_SSV;
> > + event->ssid = event->ssid_valid ? FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_SSID, event->raw[0]) : IOMMU_NO_PASID;
> > + event->privileged = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_PnU, event->raw[1]);
> > + event->instruction = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_InD, event->raw[1]);
> > + event->s2 = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_S2, event->raw[1]);
> > + event->read = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_RnW, event->raw[1]);
> > + event->stag = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_STAG, event->raw[1]);
> > + event->stall = event->raw[1] & EVTQ_1_STALL;
> > + event->class = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_1_CLASS, event->raw[1]);
> > + event->iova = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_2_ADDR, event->raw[2]);
> > + event->ipa = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_3_IPA, event->raw[3]);
> > + event->smmu = smmu;
>
> The SMMU pointer isn't part of the raw event record... TBH I'd be inclined
> to leave it entirely separate, but if you really do want to hide it in the
> arm_smmu_event, at least keep things simple and initialise it outside the
> loop - it's not like it's ever going to change between events.
Yea.. honestly, just init-ing one member at a different time makes it
look a little weird if we allocate `arm_smmu_event` dynamically.
If we go ahead with allocating the `arm_smmu_event` using k*alloc, I
think it's best to remove the `smmu` member from the struct and pass it
around in functions.
>
> Thanks,
> Robin.
>
Thanks,
Praan
> > +}
> > +
> > static irqreturn_t arm_smmu_evtq_thread(int irq, void *dev)
> > {
> > int i, ret;
> > + struct arm_smmu_event evt;
> > struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = dev;
> > struct arm_smmu_queue *q = &smmu->evtq.q;
> > struct arm_smmu_ll_queue *llq = &q->llq;
> > static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL,
> > DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST);
> > - u64 evt[EVTQ_ENT_DWORDS];
> > do {
> > - while (!queue_remove_raw(q, evt)) {
> > - u8 id = FIELD_GET(EVTQ_0_ID, evt[0]);
> > + while (!queue_remove_raw(q, evt.raw)) {
> > - ret = arm_smmu_handle_evt(smmu, evt);
> > + arm_smmu_get_event_from_raw(smmu, &evt);
> > + ret = arm_smmu_handle_evt(&evt);
> > if (!ret || !__ratelimit(&rs))
> > continue;
> > - dev_info(smmu->dev, "event 0x%02x received:\n", id);
> > - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(evt); ++i)
> > + dev_info(smmu->dev, "event 0x%02x received:\n", evt.id);
> > + for (i = 0; i < EVTQ_ENT_DWORDS; ++i)
> > dev_info(smmu->dev, "\t0x%016llx\n",
> > - (unsigned long long)evt[i]);
> > + (unsigned long long)evt.raw[i]);
> > cond_resched();
> > }
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h
> > index 1e9952ca989f..8a42d7b701fb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h
> > @@ -437,6 +437,7 @@ static inline unsigned int arm_smmu_cdtab_l2_idx(unsigned int ssid)
> > #define EVTQ_0_ID GENMASK_ULL(7, 0)
> > +/* Events */
> > #define EVT_ID_TRANSLATION_FAULT 0x10
> > #define EVT_ID_ADDR_SIZE_FAULT 0x11
> > #define EVT_ID_ACCESS_FAULT 0x12
> > @@ -452,6 +453,7 @@ static inline unsigned int arm_smmu_cdtab_l2_idx(unsigned int ssid)
> > #define EVTQ_1_RnW (1UL << 35)
> > #define EVTQ_1_S2 (1UL << 39)
> > #define EVTQ_1_CLASS GENMASK_ULL(41, 40)
> > +#define EVTQ_1_CLASS_TT 0x1
> > #define EVTQ_1_TT_READ (1UL << 44)
> > #define EVTQ_2_ADDR GENMASK_ULL(63, 0)
> > #define EVTQ_3_IPA GENMASK_ULL(51, 12)
> > @@ -771,6 +773,24 @@ struct arm_smmu_stream {
> > struct rb_node node;
> > };
> > +struct arm_smmu_event {
> > + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
> > + u8 id;
> > + u8 class;
> > + u16 stag;
> > + u32 sid;
> > + u32 ssid;
> > + u64 iova;
> > + u64 ipa;
> > + u64 raw[EVTQ_ENT_DWORDS];
> > + bool stall;
> > + bool ssid_valid;
> > + bool privileged;
> > + bool instruction;
> > + bool s2;
> > + bool read;
> > +};
> > +
> > /* SMMU private data for each master */
> > struct arm_smmu_master {
> > struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-01 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-18 18:00 [PATCH v4 0/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Parse out event records Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-18 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce struct arm_smmu_event Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-19 1:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-10-21 6:20 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-24 13:11 ` Will Deacon
2024-10-24 14:20 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-24 17:02 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-24 17:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-10-24 17:37 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-28 12:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-10-28 14:46 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-04 17:23 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-04 18:16 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-04 18:19 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-01 14:41 ` Robin Murphy
2024-11-01 15:08 ` Pranjal Shrivastava [this message]
2024-11-04 5:25 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-04 8:31 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-07 0:10 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-07 14:33 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-07 0:16 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-07 14:57 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-11 22:20 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-12 0:52 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-12 4:01 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-12 8:12 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-18 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Log better event records Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-19 2:06 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-10-19 4:51 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-10-21 6:29 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-21 6:26 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-21 22:53 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-10-24 13:15 ` Will Deacon
2024-10-24 14:14 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-29 18:53 ` Will Deacon
2024-10-29 19:59 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-24 19:00 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-10-29 18:49 ` Will Deacon
2024-11-01 15:05 ` Robin Murphy
2024-11-01 16:06 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-11-04 6:36 ` Daniel Mentz
2024-11-04 10:51 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-18 18:00 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Avoid redundant master lookup in events Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-19 2:08 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-10-19 1:45 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Parse out event records Nicolin Chen
2024-10-21 6:33 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2024-10-21 22:51 ` 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=ZyTu6tNO8gaSqKSy@google.com \
--to=praan@google.com \
--cc=danielmentz@google.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.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.