From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Vasant Hegde <vasant.hegde@amd.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, joro@8bytes.org,
suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, wei.huang2@amd.com,
jsnitsel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/12] iommu/amd: Initial SVA support for AMD IOMMU
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 19:18:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231106231831.GV4634@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231016104351.5749-6-vasant.hegde@amd.com>
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 10:43:44AM +0000, Vasant Hegde wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/amd/amd_iommu_types.h b/drivers/iommu/amd/amd_iommu_types.h
> index da94dca1eb92..20961353460d 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/amd/amd_iommu_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/amd/amd_iommu_types.h
> @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@
> #ifndef _ASM_X86_AMD_IOMMU_TYPES_H
> #define _ASM_X86_AMD_IOMMU_TYPES_H
>
> +#include <linux/iommu.h>
> #include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/mmu_notifier.h>
> #include <linux/mutex.h>
> #include <linux/msi.h>
> #include <linux/list.h>
> @@ -541,6 +543,16 @@ enum protection_domain_mode {
> PD_MODE_V2,
> };
>
> +/* Track PASID list for the protection domain */
> +struct pdom_pasid_data {
> + /* PASID attached to the protection domain */
> + ioasid_t pasid;
> + /* Points to attached device data */
> + struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data;
> + /* Link to protection domain */
> + struct list_head pdom_link;
> +};
> +
> /*
> * This structure contains generic data for IOMMU protection domains
> * independent of their use.
> @@ -556,6 +568,9 @@ struct protection_domain {
> enum protection_domain_mode pd_mode; /* Track page table type */
> unsigned dev_cnt; /* devices assigned to this domain */
> unsigned dev_iommu[MAX_IOMMUS]; /* per-IOMMU reference count */
> +
> + struct mmu_notifier mn; /* mmu notifier for the SVA domain */
> + struct list_head pasid_list; /* List of pdom_pasid_data */
> };
Oh, see here is the data structure I mentioned earlier, it just needs
to be done as part of the invalidation cleanup and replace the other
things I mentioned. Has nothing to do with SVA.
> @@ -2432,6 +2428,8 @@ static struct protection_domain *protection_domain_alloc(unsigned int type)
> case IOMMU_DOMAIN_UNMANAGED:
> pgtable = AMD_IOMMU_V1;
> break;
> + case IOMMU_DOMAIN_SVA:
> + return amd_iommu_sva_domain_alloc(domain);
Same remark as I gave intel, you should take my patch (strip the ARM
parts) to give this it's own op which significantly cleans up this
flow.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20-v2-16665a652079+5947-smmuv3_newapi_p2_jgg@nvidia.com/
> +static void dev_pasid_remove(struct pdom_pasid_data *pasid_data)
> +{
> + /* make it visible */
> + smp_wmb();
What is "it"? Don't put barriers like this, the barrier should
immediately follow whatever store it is protecting.
> +static struct pdom_pasid_data *get_pdom_pasid_data(struct protection_domain *pdom,
> + struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid)
> +{
> + struct pdom_pasid_data *pasid_data;
> + struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> +
Add a lockdep assertion, but it seems strange a function like this
would even exist.. Better to call it "remove_pdom_pasid_data" and
include the list_del(). And then pull the locking into here too.
> +static void sva_arch_invalidate_secondary_tlbs(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
> + struct mm_struct *mm,
> + unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> +{
> + struct protection_domain *sva_pdom;
> + struct pdom_pasid_data *pasid_data;
> + struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + sva_pdom = container_of(mn, struct protection_domain, mn);
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&sva_pdom->lock, flags);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(pasid_data, &sva_pdom->pasid_list, pdom_link) {
> + dev_data = pasid_data->dev_data;
> +
> + spin_lock(&dev_data->lock);
> + amd_iommu_dev_flush_pasid_pages(dev_data, pasid_data->pasid,
> + start, end - start);
Nope, can't unlock while still holding the pointer. Use a mutex or a
rcu scheme. Again this should all be general non-SVA code to fix the
entire invalidation logic.
> +static void sva_mn_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
> +{
> + struct pdom_pasid_data *pasid_data, *next;
> + struct protection_domain *sva_pdom;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + sva_pdom = container_of(mn, struct protection_domain, mn);
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&sva_pdom->lock, flags);
> +
> + /* Assume pasid_list contains same PASID with different devices */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pasid_data, next,
> + &sva_pdom->pasid_list, pdom_link) {
> + dev_pasid_remove(pasid_data);
> + }
Be mindful of any logging in other parts of the driver.. Ideally a
non-present PASID translation will generate a debugging log but a
released SVA will not.
> +static int iommu_sva_set_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> + struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid)
> +{
> + struct pdom_pasid_data *pasid_data;
> + struct protection_domain *sva_pdom = to_pdomain(domain);
> + struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> + /* PASID zero is used for requests from the I/O device without PASID */
> + if (pasid == 0 || pasid >= dev->iommu->max_pasids)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /* Use SVA protection domain lock */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&sva_pdom->lock, flags);
> +
> + /* Add PASID to protection domain pasid list */
> + pasid_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*pasid_data), GFP_KERNEL);
GFP_KERNEL under a spinlock - did you test this with full debugging?
> + if (pasid_data == NULL) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + pasid_data->pasid = pasid;
> + pasid_data->dev_data = dev_data;
> +
> + if (list_empty(&sva_pdom->pasid_list)) {
> + sva_pdom->mn.ops = &sva_mn;
> +
> + ret = mmu_notifier_register(&sva_pdom->mn, domain->mm);
> + if (ret) {
> + sva_pdom->mn.ops = NULL;
> + goto out_free_pasid_data;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* Setup GCR3 table */
> + ret = amd_iommu_set_gcr3(dev_data, pasid,
> + iommu_virt_to_phys(domain->mm->pgd));
> + if (ret)
> + goto out_unreg_notifier;
Something looks missing, what if the RID domain hasn't installed a
GCR3? Eg it is a v1 domain or something?
> + list_add(&pasid_data->pdom_link, &sva_pdom->pasid_list);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sva_pdom->lock, flags);
> + return ret;
> +
> +out_unreg_notifier:
> + mmu_notifier_unregister(&sva_pdom->mn, domain->mm);
> + sva_pdom->mn.ops = NULL;
I'm pretty sure you can't actually unregister while holding the
spinlock without creating a deadlock.
Take my SVA patch and move notifier registration to alloc/free and out
of attach to fix this.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-06 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-16 10:43 [PATCH v3 00/12] iommu/amd: SVA Support (Part 4) - SVA and IOPF Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 01/12] iommu/amd: Rename amd_iommu_v2_supported() as amd_iommu_pasid_supported() Vasant Hegde
2023-11-06 17:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 02/12] iommu/amd: Do not override PASID entry in GCR3 table Vasant Hegde
2023-11-06 17:51 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-11-07 6:26 ` Vasant Hegde
2023-11-07 13:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 03/12] iommu/amd: Introduce per device DTE update function Vasant Hegde
2023-11-06 17:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-11-07 6:47 ` Vasant Hegde
2023-11-07 13:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 04/12] iommu/amd: Add support for enabling/disabling IOMMU features Vasant Hegde
2023-11-06 17:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 05/12] iommu/amd: Initial SVA support for AMD IOMMU Vasant Hegde
2023-11-06 23:18 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2023-12-20 11:00 ` Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 06/12] iommu/amd: Add support to enable/disable PASID feature Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 07/12] iommu/amd: Move PPR-related functions into ppr.c Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 08/12] iommu/amd: Define per-IOMMU iopf_queue Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 09/12] iommu/amd: Add support for page response Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 10/12] iommu/amd: Add support for add/remove device for IOPF Vasant Hegde
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 11/12] iommu/amd: Add IO page fault notifier handler Vasant Hegde
2023-11-06 23:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-11-07 6:42 ` Vasant Hegde
2023-11-07 13:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-16 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 12/12] iommu/amd: Introduce logic to enable/disable IOPF Vasant Hegde
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=20231106231831.GV4634@ziepe.ca \
--to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jsnitsel@redhat.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=vasant.hegde@amd.com \
--cc=wei.huang2@amd.com \
/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