From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
"dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] iommu/vt-d: Move PRI handling to IOPF feature path
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 08:47:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e308d39-4f17-3b54-9f52-2b4b9ff7f951@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB527679AADCC5CA762C5BFAA68CBD9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 2023/3/17 8:06, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2023 4:17 PM
>>
>> On 2023/3/16 15:17, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>>> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 10:57 AM
>>>>
>>>> @@ -4689,17 +4704,21 @@ static int intel_iommu_disable_iopf(struct
>> device
>>>> *dev)
>>>> {
>>>> struct device_domain_info *info = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
>>>> struct intel_iommu *iommu = info->iommu;
>>>> - int ret;
>>>>
>>>> - ret = iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler(dev);
>>>> - if (ret)
>>>> - return ret;
>>>> + if (!info->pri_enabled)
>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>
>>>> - ret = iopf_queue_remove_device(iommu->iopf_queue, dev);
>>>> - if (ret)
>>>> - iommu_register_device_fault_handler(dev,
>>>> iommu_queue_iopf, dev);
>>>> + pci_disable_pri(to_pci_dev(dev));
>>>> + info->pri_enabled = 0;
>>>>
>>>> - return ret;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * With pri_enabled checked, unregistering fault handler and
>>>> + * removing device from iopf queue should never fail.
>>>> + */
>>>> + iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler(dev);
>>>> + iopf_queue_remove_device(iommu->iopf_queue, dev);
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> }
>>>
>>> PCIe spec says that clearing the enable bit doesn't mean in-fly
>>> page requests are completed:
>>> --
>>> Enable (E) - This field, when set, indicates that the Page Request
>>> Interface is allowed to make page requests. If this field is Clear,
>>> the Page Request Interface is not allowed to issue page requests.
>>> If both this field and the Stopped field are Clear, then the Page
>>> Request Interface will not issue new page requests, but has
>>> outstanding page requests that have been transmitted or are
>>> queued for transmission
>>
>> Yes. So the iommu driver should drain the in-fly PRQs.
>>
>> The Intel VT-d implementation drains the PRQs when any PASID is unbound
>> from the iommu domain (see intel_svm_drain_prq()) before reuse. Before
>> disabling iopf, the device driver should unbind pasid and disable sva,
>> so when it comes here, the PRQ should have been drained.
>>
>> Perhaps I can add below comments to make this clear:
>>
>> /*
>> * PCIe spec states that by clearing PRI enable bit, the Page
>> * Request Interface will not issue new page requests, but has
>> * outstanding page requests that have been transmitted or are
>> * queued for transmission. This is supposed to be called after
>> * the device driver has stopped DMA, all PASIDs have been
>> * unbound and the outstanding PRQs have been drained.
>> */
>>
>
> this is fine. But it should be a separate patch which removes
> check of return value. It's not caused by this PRI handling move
> patch.
Okay, that will be clearer.
Best regards,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-17 0:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-09 2:56 [PATCH v2 0/5] Refactor code for non-PRI IOPF Lu Baolu
2023-03-09 2:56 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] dmaengine: idxd: Add enable/disable device IOPF feature Lu Baolu
2023-03-09 3:51 ` Fenghua Yu
2023-03-16 7:08 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-09 2:56 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] iommu/vt-d: Allow SVA with device-specific IOPF Lu Baolu
2023-03-16 7:09 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 7:31 ` Baolu Lu
2023-03-20 16:00 ` Jacob Pan
2023-03-21 5:43 ` Baolu Lu
2023-03-09 2:56 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] iommu/vt-d: Move iopf code from SVA to IOPF enabling path Lu Baolu
2023-03-16 7:10 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-09 2:56 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] iommu/vt-d: Move pfsid and ats_qdep calculation to device probe path Lu Baolu
2023-03-16 7:10 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-20 16:11 ` Jacob Pan
2023-03-09 2:56 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] iommu/vt-d: Move PRI handling to IOPF feature path Lu Baolu
2023-03-16 7:17 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 8:17 ` Baolu Lu
2023-03-17 0:06 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-17 0:47 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2023-03-20 16:28 ` Jacob Pan
2023-03-09 3:01 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Refactor code for non-PRI IOPF Baolu Lu
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=2e308d39-4f17-3b54-9f52-2b4b9ff7f951@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox