Re: [PATCH v2 07/40] iommu: Add a page fault handler

Jean-Philippe Brucker
2018-05-29T10:00:21Z

On 26/05/18 01:35, Jacob Pan wrote:
>>>> Not exactly, it's the IOMMU driver that makes sure all LPIG in its
>>>> queues are submitted by the above flush call. In more details the
>>>> flow is:
>>>>
>>>> * Either device driver calls unbind()/sva_device_shutdown(), or the
>>>> process exits.
>>>> * If the device driver called, then it already told the device to
>>>> stop using the PASID. Otherwise we use the mm_exit() callback to
>>>> tell the device driver to stop using the PASID.
> Sorry I still need more clarification. For the PASID termination
> initiated by vfio unbind, I don't see device driver given a chance to
> stop PASID. Seems just call __iommu_sva_unbind_device() which already
> assume device stopped issuing DMA with the PASID.
> So it is the vfio unbind caller responsible for doing driver callback
> to stop DMA on a given PASID?

Yes, but I don't know how to implement this. Since PCI doesn't formalize
the PASID stop mechanism and the device doesn't have a kernel driver,
VFIO would need help from the userspace driver for stopping PASID
(notify the userspace driver when an other process exits).

>>>> * In either case, when receiving a stop request from the driver,
>>>> the device sends the LPIGs to the IOMMU queue.
>>>> * Then, the flush call above ensures that the IOMMU reports the
>>>> LPIG with iommu_report_device_fault.
>>>> * While submitting all LPIGs for this PASID to the work queue,
>>>> ipof_queue_fault also picked up all partial faults, so the partial
>>>> list is clean.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I should improve this comment?
>>>>
>>> thanks for explaining. LPIG submission is done by device
>>> asynchronously w.r.t. driver stopping/decommission PASID.
>>
>> Hmm, it should really be synchronous, otherwise there is no way to
>> know when the PASID can be decommissioned. We need a guarantee such
>> as the one in 6.20.1 of the PCIe spec, "Managing PASID TLP Prefix
>> Usage":
>>
>> "When the stop request mechanism indicates completion, the Function
>> has:
>> * Completed all Non-Posted Requests associated with this PASID.
>> * Flushed to the host all Posted Requests addressing host memory in
>> all TCs that were used by the PASID."
>>
>> That's in combination with "The function shall [...] finish
>> transmitting any multi-page Page Request Messages for this PASID
>> (i.e. send the Page Request Message with the L bit Set)." from the
>> ATS spec.
>>
> I am not contesting on the device side, what I meant was from the
> host IOMMU driver perspective, LPIG is received via IOMMU host queue,
> therefore asynchronous. Not sure about ARM, but on VT-d LPIG submission
> could meet queue full condition. So per VT-d spec, iommu will generate a
> successful auto response to the device. At this point, assume we
> already stopped the given PASID on the device, there might not be
> another LPIG sent for the device. Therefore, you could have a partial
> list. I think we can just drop the requests in the partial list for
> that PASID until the PASID gets re-allocated.

Indeed, I'll add this in next version. For a complete solution to the
queue-full condition (which seems to behave the same way on ARM) I was
thinking the IOMMU driver should also have a method for removing all
partial faults when detecting a queue overflow. Since it doesn't know
which PRGs did receive an auto-response, all it can do is remove all
partial faults, for all devices using this queue. But freeing the stuck
partial faults in flush() and remove_device() should be good enough

Thanks,
Jean