All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: jgg@nvidia.com, will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
	joro@8bytes.org, kevin.tian@intel.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, skolothumtho@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd: Allow attaching nested domain for GBPA cases
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 14:29:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aQi8TivdgmtAyb7v@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251024040551.1711281-1-nicolinc@nvidia.com>

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 09:05:51PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> A vDEVICE has been a hard requirement for attaching a nested domain to the
> device. This makes sense when installing a guest STE, since a vSID must be
> present and given to the kernel during the vDEVICE allocation.
> 
> But, when CR0.SMMUEN is disabled, VM doesn't really need a vSID to program
> the vSMMU behavior as GBPA will take effect, in which case the vSTE in the
> nested domain could have carried the bypass or abort configuration in GBPA
> register. Thus, having such a hard requirement doesn't work well for GBPA.
> 
> Add an additional condition in arm_smmu_attach_prepare_vmaster(), to allow
> a bypass or abort vSTE working for a GBPA setup. And do not forget to skip
> vsid=0 when reporting vevents, since the guest SMMU in this setup will not
> report event anyway.
> 
> Update the uAPI doc accordingly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd.c    | 14 ++++++++++++--
>  include/uapi/linux/iommufd.h                       |  7 +++++++
>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

Overall, the approach seems fine as it adds value since we can't have
vSMMUs with ABORT / BYPASS config with the current code.

> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd.c
> index 8cd8929bbfdf8..7d13b9f55512e 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd.c
> @@ -99,15 +99,22 @@ static void arm_smmu_make_nested_domain_ste(
>  int arm_smmu_attach_prepare_vmaster(struct arm_smmu_attach_state *state,
>  				    struct arm_smmu_nested_domain *nested_domain)
>  {
> +	unsigned int cfg =
> +		FIELD_GET(STRTAB_STE_0_CFG, le64_to_cpu(nested_domain->ste[0]));
>  	struct arm_smmu_vmaster *vmaster;
> -	unsigned long vsid;
> +	unsigned long vsid = 0;

I'm a little confused here, can we not have a vDEVICE allocated with
vSID = 0 ?

IIRC, vsid is given the value of vdev->virt_id, whereas vdev->virt_id is
allocated in iommufd_vdevice_alloc_ioctl() using the user-provided
cmd->virt_id.

Thus, should we mention this in the uAPI that vdev->virt_id 0 is reserved?

Because otherwise, a VMM may actually allocate a vDEVICE with vSID = 0
(which iommufd currently allows) and we'll start dropping its events
due to the if (!vmaster->vsid) check below. This would be a functional 
regression for such a VMM.

Perhaps a separate bool has_vdevice flag in struct arm_smmu_vmaster
would be clearer and avoid this ambiguity, allowing vsid = 0 to be a
valid ID for an allocated vdevice when user-space explicitly requests it?

>  	int ret;
>  
>  	iommu_group_mutex_assert(state->master->dev);
>  
>  	ret = iommufd_viommu_get_vdev_id(&nested_domain->vsmmu->core,
>  					 state->master->dev, &vsid);
> -	if (ret)
> +	/*
> +	 * Attaching to a translate nested domain must allocate a vDEVICE prior,
> +	 * as CD/ATS invalidations and vevents require a vSID to work properly.
> +	 * A bypass/abort domain is allowed to attach with vsid=0 for GBPA case.
> +	 */
> +	if (ret && cfg == STRTAB_STE_0_CFG_S1_TRANS)
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	vmaster = kzalloc(sizeof(*vmaster), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -460,6 +467,9 @@ int arm_vmaster_report_event(struct arm_smmu_vmaster *vmaster, u64 *evt)
>  
>  	lockdep_assert_held(&vmaster->vsmmu->smmu->streams_mutex);
>  
> +	if (!vmaster->vsid)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
>  	vevt.evt[0] = cpu_to_le64((evt[0] & ~EVTQ_0_SID) |
>  				  FIELD_PREP(EVTQ_0_SID, vmaster->vsid));
>  	for (i = 1; i < EVTQ_ENT_DWORDS; i++)
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/iommufd.h b/include/uapi/linux/iommufd.h
> index c218c89e0e2eb..a2527425f398b 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/iommufd.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/iommufd.h
> @@ -450,6 +450,13 @@ struct iommu_hwpt_vtd_s1 {
>   * nested domain will translate the same as the nesting parent. The S1 will
>   * install a Context Descriptor Table pointing at userspace memory translated
>   * by the nesting parent.
> + *
> + * Notes
> + * - when Cfg=translate, a vdevice must be allocated prior to attaching to the
> + *   allocated nested domain, as CD/ATS invalidations and vevents need a vSID.
> + * - when Cfg=bypass/abort, vdevice is not required to attach to the allocated
> + *   nested domain. This particularly works for a GBPA case, when CR0.SMMUEN=0
> + *   in the guest VM.
>   */
>  struct iommu_hwpt_arm_smmuv3 {
>  	__aligned_le64 ste[2];
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

Thanks,
Praan



  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-11-03 14:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-24  4:05 [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd: Allow attaching nested domain for GBPA cases Nicolin Chen
2025-10-31 12:49 ` Shameer Kolothum
2025-11-03 14:29 ` Pranjal Shrivastava [this message]
2025-11-03 15:45   ` 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=aQi8TivdgmtAyb7v@google.com \
    --to=praan@google.com \
    --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=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=skolothumtho@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.