From: robin.murphy@arm.com (Robin Murphy)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RESEND,3/3] iommu/dma: Plumb in the per-CPU IOVA caches
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 19:56:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c43b1f8f-02fd-978c-0dee-cc3f76a9924b@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704061315040.4602@lazy>
On 06/04/17 19:15, Manoj Iyer wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2017, Robin Murphy wrote:
>
>> With IOVA allocation suitably tidied up, we are finally free to opt in
>> to the per-CPU caching mechanism. The caching alone can provide a modest
>> improvement over walking the rbtree for weedier systems (iperf3 shows
>> ~10% more ethernet throughput on an ARM Juno r1 constrained to a single
>> 650MHz Cortex-A53), but the real gain will be in sidestepping the rbtree
>> lock contention which larger ARM-based systems with lots of parallel I/O
>> are starting to feel the pain of.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Nate Watterson <nwatters@codeaurora.org>
>> Tested-by: Nate Watterson <nwatters@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>> index 1b94beb43036..8348f366ddd1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>> @@ -361,8 +361,7 @@ static dma_addr_t iommu_dma_alloc_iova(struct
>> iommu_domain *domain,
>> {
>> struct iommu_dma_cookie *cookie = domain->iova_cookie;
>> struct iova_domain *iovad = &cookie->iovad;
>> - unsigned long shift, iova_len;
>> - struct iova *iova = NULL;
>> + unsigned long shift, iova_len, iova = 0;
>>
>> if (cookie->type == IOMMU_DMA_MSI_COOKIE) {
>> cookie->msi_iova += size;
>> @@ -371,41 +370,39 @@ static dma_addr_t iommu_dma_alloc_iova(struct
>> iommu_domain *domain,
>>
>> shift = iova_shift(iovad);
>> iova_len = size >> shift;
>> + /*
>> + * Freeing non-power-of-two-sized allocations back into the IOVA
>> caches
>> + * will come back to bite us badly, so we have to waste a bit of
>> space
>> + * rounding up anything cacheable to make sure that can't happen.
>> The
>> + * order of the unadjusted size will still match upon freeing.
>> + */
>> + if (iova_len < (1 << (IOVA_RANGE_CACHE_MAX_SIZE - 1)))
>> + iova_len = roundup_pow_of_two(iova_len);
>>
>> if (domain->geometry.force_aperture)
>> dma_limit = min(dma_limit, domain->geometry.aperture_end);
>>
>> /* Try to get PCI devices a SAC address */
>> if (dma_limit > DMA_BIT_MASK(32) && dev_is_pci(dev))
>> - iova = alloc_iova(iovad, iova_len, DMA_BIT_MASK(32) >> shift,
>> - true);
>> - /*
>> - * Enforce size-alignment to be safe - there could perhaps be an
>> - * attribute to control this per-device, or at least per-domain...
>> - */
>> - if (!iova)
>> - iova = alloc_iova(iovad, iova_len, dma_limit >> shift, true);
>> + iova = alloc_iova_fast(iovad, iova_len, DMA_BIT_MASK(32) >>
>> shift);
>>
>> - return (dma_addr_t)iova->pfn_lo << shift;
>> + if (!iova)
>> + iova = alloc_iova_fast(iovad, iova_len, dma_limit >> shift);
>> +
>> + return (dma_addr_t)iova << shift;
>> }
>>
>> static void iommu_dma_free_iova(struct iommu_dma_cookie *cookie,
>> dma_addr_t iova, size_t size)
>> {
>> struct iova_domain *iovad = &cookie->iovad;
>> - struct iova *iova_rbnode;
>> + unsigned long shift = iova_shift(iovad);
>>
>> /* The MSI case is only ever cleaning up its most recent
>> allocation */
>> - if (cookie->type == IOMMU_DMA_MSI_COOKIE) {
>> + if (cookie->type == IOMMU_DMA_MSI_COOKIE)
>> cookie->msi_iova -= size;
>> - return;
>> - }
>> -
>> - iova_rbnode = find_iova(iovad, iova_pfn(iovad, iova));
>> - if (WARN_ON(!iova_rbnode))
>> - return;
>> -
>> - __free_iova(iovad, iova_rbnode);
>> + else
>> + free_iova_fast(iovad, iova >> shift, size >> shift);
>> }
>>
>> static void __iommu_dma_unmap(struct iommu_domain *domain, dma_addr_t
>> dma_addr,
>>
>
> This patch series helps to resolve the Ubuntu bug, where we see the
> Ubuntu Zesty (4.10 based) kernel reporting multi cpu soft lockups on
> QDF2400 SDP. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1680549
Wow, how many separate buffers does that driver have mapped at once to
spend 22 seconds walking the rbtree for a single allocation!? I'd almost
expect that to indicate a deadlock.
I'm guessing you wouldn't have seen this on older kernels, since I
assume that particular platform is booting via ACPI, so wouldn't have
had the SMMU enabled without the IORT support which landed in 4.10.
> This patch series along with the following cherry-picks from Linus's tree
> dddd632b072f iommu/dma: Implement PCI allocation optimisation
> de84f5f049d9 iommu/dma: Stop getting dma_32bit_pfn wrong
>
> were applied to Ubuntu Zesty 4.10 kernel (Ubuntu-4.10.0-18.20) and
> tested on a QDF2400 SDP.
>
> Tested-by: Manoj Iyer <manoj.iyer@canonical.com>
Thanks,
Robin.
>
>
> --
> ============================
> Manoj Iyer
> Ubuntu/Canonical
> ARM Servers - Cloud
> ============================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-06 18:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-31 14:46 [PATCH RESEND 0/3] IOVA allocation improvements for iommu-dma Robin Murphy
2017-03-31 14:46 ` [PATCH RESEND 1/3] iommu/dma: Convert to address-based allocation Robin Murphy
2017-04-06 18:11 ` [RESEND,1/3] " Manoj Iyer
2017-03-31 14:46 ` [PATCH RESEND 2/3] iommu/dma: Clean up MSI IOVA allocation Robin Murphy
2017-04-06 18:14 ` [RESEND,2/3] " Manoj Iyer
2017-03-31 14:46 ` [PATCH RESEND 3/3] iommu/dma: Plumb in the per-CPU IOVA caches Robin Murphy
2017-04-06 18:15 ` [RESEND,3/3] " Manoj Iyer
2017-04-06 18:56 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2017-04-07 7:22 ` Nate Watterson
2017-04-03 10:45 ` [PATCH RESEND 0/3] IOVA allocation improvements for iommu-dma Joerg Roedel
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=c43b1f8f-02fd-978c-0dee-cc3f76a9924b@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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).