From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: santosh Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] linuxapp/eal: auto detect iova mode Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 23:55:22 +0530 Message-ID: <00d16b14-0bf7-6352-eb78-488ee3ffc16e@caviumnetworks.com> References: <20170710114235.18970-1-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> <20170711061631.5018-1-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> <20170711061631.5018-8-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> <84703290-1800-1f0c-8a48-bc2b60eb7839@nxp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: bruce.richardson@intel.com, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, shreyansh.jain@nxp.com, gaetan.rivet@6wind.com, sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com, anatoly.burakov@intel.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, maxime.coquelin@redhat.com, olivier.matz@6wind.com To: Hemant Agrawal , thomas@monjalon.net, dev@dpdk.org Return-path: Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-co1nam03on0040.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.40.40]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA40A2BAA for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 20:25:41 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <84703290-1800-1f0c-8a48-bc2b60eb7839@nxp.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thursday 13 July 2017 04:59 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote: > On 7/11/2017 11:46 AM, Santosh Shukla wrote: >> - Moving late bus scanning to up..just after eal_parsing. >> - Auto detect iova mapping mode, based on the result of >> rte_bus_scan_iommu_class. >> >> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla >> Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob >> --- >> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c | 16 ++++++++++------ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c >> index 2546b55e4..7b4dd70de 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c >> @@ -799,6 +799,16 @@ rte_eal_init(int argc, char **argv) >> return -1; >> } >> >> + if (rte_bus_scan()) { >> + rte_eal_init_alert("Cannot scan the buses for devices\n"); >> + rte_errno = ENODEV; >> + return -1; >> + } >> + > > The original place of the bus scan was with the following factors: > 1. The bus scan requires the VFIO to be enabled atleast in dpaa2 case. > (VFIO code still need cleanup to be support non-pci cleanly). I tried moving it before bus_scan, this helped in bus scanning. > bus_scan should do scanning, device enumeration, detecting devices and interface that device bound to, that interface could be VFIO, UIO, UIO_GENERIC etc.. PCI bus scanning (in eal/) strictly comply to what I mentioned above, thus aut-detection works gracefully. However fslmc_bus 'scan' doesn't do device scanning, instead It call vfio dependent code which ideally should fall in 'resource mapping' category,. ideally should happen at bus probe time. Example: rte_fslmc_bus_scan() --> fslmc_vfio_setup_group --> fslmc_vfio_process_group So it is doing _setup_ inside scan ops, which in PCI(/vfio-pci) case happens at probe time (`vfio_setup_device`). In order to benefit iova auto-detection infrastructure: fslmc bus should do to two things: 0) fslmc bus scan should look at /sys/bus/platform/drivers/vfio-platform/* and find out that devices bind to vfio-platform or not, if yes then update kdrv entry mentioning interface type example VFIO. That-way flsmc bus gets capability to inform rte_bus about IOMMU capable interface. Right now, existing implementation don't have means to inform rte_bus about his devices like pci_bus has!. 1) defer the vfio_seup from scan to bus->probe(). > 2. During SCAN, the bus may allocate memory to devices or for it's own usages. rte_malloc or mempool is required in cases to support multi-process environment. (e.g. dpaa2 create dpbp or dpio device memory using the rte_malloc call). > If bus scanning adheres to device detection or enumeration then rte_malloc/mempool not required, Example eal/pci bus scanning. And in fslmc bus case: if vfio_setup deferred at bus->probe time then bus->scan won't have memory dependency. > Since none of the other rte library (mempool, memzone, tailq) is available at this point, it will create significant restriction on the bus scan. > > We will prefer if you can re-introduce the "iova_mode" and allow the application choose, which mode it want to run. > > This auto-detect logic may not work for many buses and it is going > to create serious restrictions on the bus_scan code. > fslmc is only bus besides PCI. Auto-detection works gracefully for PCI-bus. Can you give a try to said proposal? Ideally vfio-platform code should sit into eal/vfio like eal/vfio-pci is. Otherwise it will keep creating problems for new generic framework like we're discussing one. if said proposal doesn't work for you then I will re-introduce iova-mode as eal arg, that will override iova mapping mode. But IMHO, eal arg should be intermediate solution. Once vfio-platform code properly re-factored and merged, We should remove those eal iova-mode args. >> + /* autodetect the iova mapping mode (default is iova_pa) */ >> + if (rte_bus_get_iommu_class() == RTE_IOVA_VA) >> + rte_eal_get_configuration()->iova_mode = RTE_IOVA_VA; >> + >> if (internal_config.no_hugetlbfs == 0 && >> internal_config.process_type != RTE_PROC_SECONDARY && >> internal_config.xen_dom0_support == 0 && >> @@ -896,12 +906,6 @@ rte_eal_init(int argc, char **argv) >> return -1; >> } >> >> - if (rte_bus_scan()) { >> - rte_eal_init_alert("Cannot scan the buses for devices\n"); >> - rte_errno = ENODEV; >> - return -1; >> - } >> - >> RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_SLAVE(i) { >> >> /* >> > >