From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Christian Benvenuti <benve@cisco.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Nelson Escobar <neescoba@cisco.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] iommu: Introduce the domain op enforce_cache_coherency()
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 19:57:39 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220405225739.GW2120790@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220405135036.4812c51e.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 01:50:36PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >
> > +static bool intel_iommu_enforce_cache_coherency(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> > +{
> > + struct dmar_domain *dmar_domain = to_dmar_domain(domain);
> > +
> > + if (!dmar_domain->iommu_snooping)
> > + return false;
> > + dmar_domain->enforce_no_snoop = true;
> > + return true;
> > +}
>
> Don't we have issues if we try to set DMA_PTE_SNP on DMARs that don't
> support it, ie. reserved register bit set in pte faults?
The way the Intel driver is setup that is not possible. Currently it
does:
static bool intel_iommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY)
return domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL);
Which is a global property unrelated to any device.
Thus either all devices and all domains support iommu_snooping, or
none do.
It is unclear because for some reason the driver recalculates this
almost constant value on every device attach..
> There's also a disconnect, maybe just in the naming or documentation,
> but if I call enforce_cache_coherency for a domain, that seems like the
> domain should retain those semantics regardless of how it's
> modified,
Right, this is how I would expect it to work.
> ie. "enforced". For example, if I tried to perform the above operation,
> I should get a failure attaching the device that brings in the less
> capable DMAR because the domain has been set to enforce this
> feature.
We don't have any code causing a failure like this because no driver
needs it.
> Maybe this should be something like set_no_snoop_squashing with the
> above semantics, it needs to be re-applied whenever the domain:device
> composition changes? Thanks,
If we get a real driver that needs non-uniformity here we can revisit
what to do. There are a couple of good options depending on exactly
what the HW behavior is.
Is it more clear if I fold in the below? It helps show that the
decision to use DMA_PTE_SNP is a global choice based on
domain_update_iommu_snooping():
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
index e5062461ab0640..fc789a9d955645 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
@@ -641,7 +641,6 @@ static unsigned long domain_super_pgsize_bitmap(struct dmar_domain *domain)
static void domain_update_iommu_cap(struct dmar_domain *domain)
{
domain_update_iommu_coherency(domain);
- domain->iommu_snooping = domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL);
domain->iommu_superpage = domain_update_iommu_superpage(domain, NULL);
/*
@@ -4283,7 +4282,6 @@ static int md_domain_init(struct dmar_domain *domain, int guest_width)
domain->agaw = width_to_agaw(adjust_width);
domain->iommu_coherency = false;
- domain->iommu_snooping = false;
domain->iommu_superpage = 0;
domain->max_addr = 0;
@@ -4549,7 +4547,7 @@ static bool intel_iommu_enforce_cache_coherency(struct iommu_domain *domain)
{
struct dmar_domain *dmar_domain = to_dmar_domain(domain);
- if (!dmar_domain->iommu_snooping)
+ if (!domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL))
return false;
dmar_domain->enforce_no_snoop = true;
return true;
diff --git a/include/linux/intel-iommu.h b/include/linux/intel-iommu.h
index 1f930c0c225d94..bc39f633efdf03 100644
--- a/include/linux/intel-iommu.h
+++ b/include/linux/intel-iommu.h
@@ -539,7 +539,6 @@ struct dmar_domain {
u8 has_iotlb_device: 1;
u8 iommu_coherency: 1; /* indicate coherency of iommu access */
- u8 iommu_snooping: 1; /* indicate snooping control feature */
u8 enforce_no_snoop : 1; /* Create IOPTEs with snoop control */
struct list_head devices; /* all devices' list */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-06 5:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-05 16:15 [PATCH 0/5] Make the iommu driver no-snoop block feature consistent Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-05 16:16 ` [PATCH 1/5] iommu: Replace uses of IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY with dev_is_dma_coherent() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 5:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-06 12:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 13:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-06 14:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 15:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-06 15:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 15:48 ` Robin Murphy
2022-04-06 13:56 ` Robin Murphy
2022-04-06 14:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 15:18 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 15:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-06 16:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 16:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-06 17:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-07 7:18 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-07 13:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-07 15:17 ` Robin Murphy
2022-04-07 15:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-07 22:37 ` Alex Williamson
2022-04-07 15:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-07 8:53 ` Niklas Schnelle
2022-04-05 16:16 ` [PATCH 2/5] vfio: Require that devices support DMA cache coherence Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-05 19:10 ` Alex Williamson
2022-04-05 19:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 7:02 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-07 14:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-05 16:16 ` [PATCH 3/5] iommu: Introduce the domain op enforce_cache_coherency() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-05 19:50 ` Alex Williamson
2022-04-05 22:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2022-04-05 23:31 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-06 0:08 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-06 7:09 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-06 12:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-05 16:16 ` [PATCH 4/5] vfio: Move the Intel no-snoop control off of IOMMU_CACHE Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-05 16:16 ` [PATCH 5/5] iommu: Delete IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-06 6:52 ` [PATCH 0/5] Make the iommu driver no-snoop block feature consistent Tian, Kevin
2022-04-07 14:56 ` 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=20220405225739.GW2120790@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=benve@cisco.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.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-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=neescoba@cisco.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robdclark@gmail.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--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