linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
	patches@lists.linux.dev, Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: Remove split on unmap behavior
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:09:51 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241104200951.GE10193@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cf17dc41-f72a-4d90-a78d-2d90fa0ac243@arm.com>

On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 07:53:46PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2024-11-04 5:41 pm, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > A minority of page table implementations (arm_lpae, armv7) are unique in
> > how they handle partial unmap of large IOPTEs.
> > 
> > Other implementations will unmap the large IOPTE and return it's
> > length. For example if a 2M IOPTE is present and the first 4K is requested
> > to be unmapped then unmap will remove the whole 2M and report 2M as the
> > result.
> > 
> > armv7 instead will break up contiguous entries and replace an entry with a
> > whole table so it can unmap the requested 4k.
> > 
> > This seems copied from the arm_lpae implementation, which was analyzed
> > here:
> > 
> >   https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241024134411.GA6956@nvidia.com/
> > 
> > Bring consistency to the implementations and remove this unused
> > functionality.
> > 
> > There are no uses outside iommu, this effects the ARM_V7S drivers
> > msm_iommu, mtk_iommu, and arm-smmmu.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s.c | 125 +----------------------------
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 121 deletions(-)
> 
> Yikes, I'd forgotten quite how much horribleness was devoted to this,
> despite it being the "simpler" non-recursive one...

Yes, it is the contiguous page support that makes it so complex..

> However, there are also "partial unmap" cases in both sets of selftests, so
> I think there's still a bit more to remove yet :)

Sneaky, I got it thanks

Runs OK now:

arm-v7s io-pgtable: self test ok
arm-lpae io-pgtable: selftest: pgsize_bitmap 0x40201000, IAS 32

Jason

--- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s.c
@@ -819,7 +819,7 @@ static int __init arm_v7s_do_selftests(void)
 		.quirks = IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_ARM_NS,
 		.pgsize_bitmap = SZ_4K | SZ_64K | SZ_1M | SZ_16M,
 	};
-	unsigned int iova, size, iova_start;
+	unsigned int iova, size;
 	unsigned int i, loopnr = 0;
 	size_t mapped;
 
@@ -871,25 +871,6 @@ static int __init arm_v7s_do_selftests(void)
 		loopnr++;
 	}
 
-	/* Partial unmap */
-	i = 1;
-	size = 1UL << __ffs(cfg.pgsize_bitmap);
-	while (i < loopnr) {
-		iova_start = i * SZ_16M;
-		if (ops->unmap_pages(ops, iova_start + size, size, 1, NULL) != size)
-			return __FAIL(ops);
-
-		/* Remap of partial unmap */
-		if (ops->map_pages(ops, iova_start + size, size, size, 1,
-				   IOMMU_READ, GFP_KERNEL, &mapped))
-			return __FAIL(ops);
-
-		if (ops->iova_to_phys(ops, iova_start + size + 42)
-		    != (size + 42))
-			return __FAIL(ops);
-		i++;
-	}
-
 	/* Full unmap */
 	iova = 0;
 	for_each_set_bit(i, &cfg.pgsize_bitmap, BITS_PER_LONG) {


  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-04 20:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-04 17:41 [PATCH v2 0/3] Remove split on unmap behavior Jason Gunthorpe
2024-11-04 17:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] iommu/io-pgtable-arm: " Jason Gunthorpe
2024-11-04 18:38   ` Liviu Dudau
2024-11-06 15:12   ` Steven Price
2024-11-04 17:41 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: " Jason Gunthorpe
2024-11-04 19:53   ` Robin Murphy
2024-11-04 20:09     ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2024-11-05 16:59       ` Will Deacon
2024-11-05 17:11         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-11-04 17:41 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] iommu: Add a kdoc to iommu_unmap() Jason Gunthorpe
2024-11-04 18:42   ` Liviu Dudau
2024-11-05  3:46   ` kernel test robot

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=20241104200951.GE10193@nvidia.com \
    --to=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=liviu.dudau@arm.com \
    --cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=steven.price@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).