From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: <kevin.tian@intel.com>, <will@kernel.org>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
<suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
<dwmw2@infradead.org>, <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
<shuah@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 05/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID ioctl
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:10:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZsOKe10cOTCcHOIP@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240819173332.GM2032816@nvidia.com>
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 02:33:32PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 05:21:57PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
>
> > > Why not? The idev becomes linked to the viommu when the dev id is set
> >
> > > Unless we are also going to enforce the idev is always attached to a
> > > nested then I don't think we need to check it here.
> > >
> > > Things will definately not entirely work as expected if the vdev is
> > > directly attached to the s2 or a blocking, but it won't harm anything.
> >
> > My view is that, the moment there is a VIOMMU object, that must
> > be a nested IOMMU case, so there must be a nested hwpt. Blocking
> > domain would be a hwpt_nested too (vSTE=Abort) as we previously
> > concluded.
>
> I'm not sure other vendors can do that vSTE=Abort/Bypass thing though
> yet..
>
> > Then, in a nested case, it feels odd that an idev is attached to
> > an S2 hwpt..
> >
> > That being said, I think we can still do that with validations:
> > If idev->hwpt is nested, compare input viommu v.s idev->hwpt->viommu.
> > If idev->hwpt is paging, compare input viommu->hwpt v.s idev->hwpt.
>
> But again, if you don't contiguously validate those invariants in all
> the other attach paths it is sort of pointless to check them since the
> userspace can still violate things.
Hmm, would that be unsafe? I start to wonder if we should allow an
attach to viommu and put validations on that?
> > This complicates things overall especially with the VIRQ that has
> > involved interrupt context polling vdev_id, where semaphore/mutex
> > won't fit very well. Perhaps it would need a driver-level bottom
> > half routine to call those helpers with locks. I am glad that you
> > noticed the problem early.
>
> I think you have to show the xarray to the driver and the driver can
> use the spinlock to access it safely. Keeping it hidden in the core
> code is causing all these locking problems.
Yea, I just figured that out... You have been right. I was able to
get rid of the locking problem with invalidation API. But then irq
became a headache as drivers would only know the dev pointer, so
everything that the dev could convert to would be unsafe as it can
not grab the idev/viommu locks until it converts.
Thanks
Nicolin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-19 18:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-07 20:10 [PATCH v1 00/16] iommufd: Add VIOMMU infrastructure (Part-1) Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 01/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMUFD_OBJ_VIOMMU and IOMMU_VIOMMU_ALLOC ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-14 16:50 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 18:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 18:20 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 18:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 02/16] iommu: Pass in a viommu pointer to domain_alloc_user op Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 03/16] iommufd: Allow pt_id to carry viommu_id for IOMMU_HWPT_ALLOC Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 04/16] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_ALLOC test coverage Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 05/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-14 17:09 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-14 22:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 19:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 19:46 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 19:53 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 23:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-16 0:21 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 17:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:10 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2024-08-19 18:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 06/16] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID test coverage Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 07/16] iommufd/viommu: Add cache_invalidate for IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_DEFAULT Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 08/16] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_INVALIDATE ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-15 23:51 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 17:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 17:49 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 18:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:22 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 09/16] iommufd/viommu: Make iommufd_viommu_find_device a public API Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 10/16] iommufd/selftest: Add mock_viommu_invalidate_user op Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 11/16] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_TEST_OP_DEV_CHECK_CACHE test command Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 12/16] iommufd/selftest: Add coverage for IOMMU_VIOMMU_INVALIDATE ioctl Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 13/16] iommufd/viommu: Add iommufd_viommu_to_parent_domain helper Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 14/16] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Extract an __arm_smmu_cache_invalidate_user helper Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 15/16] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add viommu cache invalidation support Nicolin Chen
2024-08-15 23:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-16 0:50 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 17:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:19 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 18:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:38 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-19 18:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19 18:54 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-08-07 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 16/16] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Allow ATS for IOMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED 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=ZsOKe10cOTCcHOIP@Asurada-Nvidia \
--to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.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).