public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: <joro@8bytes.org>, <will@kernel.org>, <marcan@marcan.st>,
	<sven@svenpeter.dev>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	<robdclark@gmail.com>, <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
	<orsonzhai@gmail.com>, <baolin.wang7@gmail.com>,
	<zhang.lyra@gmail.com>, <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
	<alex.williamson@redhat.com>, <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	<kevin.tian@intel.com>
Cc: <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>,
	<dwmw2@infradead.org>, <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
	<gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>, <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	<vdumpa@nvidia.com>, <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	<thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>, <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
	<chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>, <john.garry@huawei.com>,
	<yangyingliang@huawei.com>, <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
	<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	<kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v5 2/5] vfio/iommu_type1: Prefer to reuse domains vs match enforced cache coherency
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:44:52 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220701214455.14992-3-nicolinc@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220701214455.14992-1-nicolinc@nvidia.com>

From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>

The KVM mechanism for controlling wbinvd is based on OR of the coherency
property of all devices attached to a guest, no matter whether those
devices are attached to a single domain or multiple domains.

On the other hand, the benefit to using separate domains was that those
devices attached to domains supporting enforced cache coherency always
mapped with the attributes necessary to provide that feature, therefore
if a non-enforced domain was dropped, the associated group removal would
re-trigger an evaluation by KVM.

In practice however, the only known cases of such mixed domains included
an Intel IGD device behind an IOMMU lacking snoop control, where such
devices do not support hotplug, therefore this scenario lacks testing and
is not considered sufficiently relevant to support.

After all, KVM won't take advantage of trying to push a device that could
do enforced cache coherency to a dedicated domain vs re-using an existing
domain, which is non-coherent.

Simplify this code and eliminate the test. This removes the only logic
that needed to have a dummy domain attached prior to searching for a
matching domain and simplifies the next patches.

It's unclear whether we want to further optimize the Intel driver to
update the domain coherency after a device is detached from it, at
least not before KVM can be verified to handle such dynamics in related
emulation paths (wbinvd, vcpu load, write_cr0, ept, etc.). In reality
we don't see an usage requiring such optimization as the only device
which imposes such non-coherency is Intel GPU which even doesn't
support hotplug/hot remove.

Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
index c496b7d0b96f..7530f0d727e5 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
@@ -2288,9 +2288,7 @@ static int vfio_iommu_type1_attach_group(void *iommu_data,
 	 * testing if they're on the same bus_type.
 	 */
 	list_for_each_entry(d, &iommu->domain_list, next) {
-		if (d->domain->ops == domain->domain->ops &&
-		    d->enforce_cache_coherency ==
-			    domain->enforce_cache_coherency) {
+		if (d->domain->ops == domain->domain->ops) {
 			iommu_detach_group(domain->domain, group->iommu_group);
 			if (!iommu_attach_group(d->domain,
 						group->iommu_group)) {
-- 
2.17.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-07-01 21:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-07-01 21:44 [PATCH v5 0/5] cover-letter: Simplify vfio_iommu_type1 attach/detach routine Nicolin Chen
2022-07-01 21:44 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] iommu: Return -EMEDIUMTYPE for incompatible domain and device/group Nicolin Chen
2022-07-29 17:30   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-07-01 21:44 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2022-07-01 21:44 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] vfio/iommu_type1: Remove the domain->ops comparison Nicolin Chen
2022-07-29 17:33   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-07-01 21:44 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] vfio/iommu_type1: Clean up update_dirty_scope in detach_group() Nicolin Chen
2022-07-29 17:34   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-07-01 21:44 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] vfio/iommu_type1: Simplify group attachment Nicolin Chen
2022-07-06 17:42 ` [PATCH v5 0/5] cover-letter: Simplify vfio_iommu_type1 attach/detach routine Alex Williamson
2022-07-06 17:53   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-07-06 18:03     ` Alex Williamson
2022-07-13 23:57       ` Nicolin Chen
2022-07-26 18:32         ` 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=20220701214455.14992-3-nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=alyssa@rosenzweig.io \
    --cc=baolin.wang7@gmail.com \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=chenxiang66@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcan@marcan.st \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=orsonzhai@gmail.com \
    --cc=robdclark@gmail.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=sven@svenpeter.dev \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
    --cc=vdumpa@nvidia.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yangyingliang@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhang.lyra@gmail.com \
    /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