From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: <iommu@lists.linux.dev>, "Joerg Roedel (AMD)" <joro@8bytes.org>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jpb@kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
"Pasha Tatashin" <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
<patches@lists.linux.dev>,
"Pranjal Shrivastava" <praan@google.com>,
Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@google.com>,
Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Change how the tlbi describes the invalidation
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 22:29:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ak3gPqsdg94TTDLJ@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7-v2-43074a57a53a+fb95-smmu_tlbi_jgg@nvidia.com>
On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 01:26:44PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> + * Compute the stride for non-RIL single-page invalidation. Returns the log2
> + * stride of the lowest affected level. Single invalidation removes all IOPTEs
> + * that contain the IOVA invalidated, and we can reliably assume that the
> + * architected page size and table sizes (not contiguous!) are reflected in the
> + * IOTLB. Thus if there is a 2M leaf entry we only need to issue a single IOTLB
> + * invalidation within that 2M IOVA.
> + */
> +static u8 arm_smmu_tlbi_calc_stride(struct arm_smmu_tlbi *tlbi)
> +{
> + unsigned int tg_lg2 = tlbi->smmu_domain->tgsz_lg2;
> + u8 combined = tlbi->table_levels_bitmap | tlbi->leaf_levels_bitmap;
> +
> + if (!combined)
> + return U8_MAX;
> + return (tg_lg2 - 3) * __ffs(combined) + tg_lg2;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * One TLBI command per stride-sized entry. Sets use_full_inv if too many
This is raised by Claude; not sure whether it is a false positive
or not.
This changes a previous per-pte invalidation to per-pmd one. Yet,
the spec states in 4.4 TLB invalidation (last paragraph):
To match a TLB entry, the least significant bits of the address
are ignored as needed, given the size of the entry.
So, the following scenario would likely miss leaf entries:
VFIO_IOMMU_UNMAP_DMA / IOMMU_IOAS_UNMAP
iommu_unmap(domain, iova=0x40000000, size=2M)
__iommu_unmap()
iommu_pgsize() -> picks pgsize=2M (aligned, 2M in pgsize_bitmap;
irrelevant that the region was mapped as 4K pages)
arm_lpae_unmap_pages(iova, 2M, pgcount=1, gather)
__arm_lpae_unmap(lvl=0) -> lvl=1 -> lvl=2: size == BLOCK_SIZE(lvl 2)
pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep) -> a TABLE descriptor, not a block
__arm_lpae_clear_pte() # L2 descriptor := 0
io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk(iova, 2M, granule=4K)
arm_smmu_tlb_inv_walk()
tlbi = { start=0x40000000, last=0x401fffff,
table_levels_bitmap = BIT((ilog2(2M)-12)/9) = 0b010,
leaf_levels_bitmap = 0 } <-- the false claim
arm_smmu_domain_tlbi()
arm_smmu_tlbi_calc_single():
calc_stride: __ffs(0b010) = 1 -> stride = 2M
num_ops = 2M >> 21 = 1
arm_smmu_domain_tlbi_inv()
non-RIL entry: ONE TLBI_NH_VA @0x40000000, Leaf=0
-> kills the walk entry + the 4K leaf at base
-> 511 4K leaves SURVIVE
__arm_lpae_free_pgtable() # subtree freed, no invalidation
iommu_iotlb_sync(domain, &gather) # gather->pgsize == 0 -> returns immediately
> + * If leaf_levels_bitmap is 0 then this is a walk cache only
> + * invalidation.
[...]
> + u8 leaf_levels_bitmap;
Or is that only to implement a walkcache-only invalidation, such
that the leaf entries will have separate invalidation call(s)?
Nicolin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-08 5:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-06 16:26 [PATCH v2 0/8] Organize the SMMUv3 invalidation flow so iommupt can use it Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pass the parameters for the invalidation in a struct Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 3:04 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 11:18 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move pgsize out of arm_smmu_inv Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 3:57 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 16:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 17:21 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 11:24 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-07 18:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Optimize range invalidation for latency Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 7:27 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 19:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 21:07 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 11:45 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-08 0:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Keep track in the arm_smmu_invs if RIL is used Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 7:27 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 11:46 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Precompute the invalidation commands Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 11:52 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-07 14:58 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-08 9:00 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-07 20:31 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Populate the tlbi at the top of the call chain Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 11:57 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-07 21:51 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Change how the tlbi describes the invalidation Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-06 18:00 ` Robin Murphy
2026-07-06 19:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-08 1:41 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-08 5:29 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2026-07-06 16:26 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Support the DS expansion of RIL's SCALE Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-07 23:20 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-08 0:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-08 2:10 ` Nicolin Chen
2026-07-07 12:25 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] Organize the SMMUv3 invalidation flow so iommupt can use it Mostafa Saleh
2026-07-07 15:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=ak3gPqsdg94TTDLJ@Asurada-Nvidia \
--to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jpb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=skhawaja@google.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.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