From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D3FCC63777 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC37520872 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="haJwrw/l" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BC37520872 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5FB2E25D; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7aP41iQVkar2; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0FD220494; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77B74C0891; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8E3BC0052 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA631878ED for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6MuxXVB3G1FU for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6F4F878DF for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:35:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1606426536; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=z982jnqmuXNIrAhimGtzkblqKSt24Z3qnI8EZ/1iDQY=; b=haJwrw/lHDJi6u7357ieuFEuzotNvbt9IjFVV8S88ui+F2R+1v+GgPSW6B8LB0IIIsrwwW hmZOwVQEIWbT9UIukwqGiZtT7YiFhWTqpH/zCqDjuQxBtPFV87xvr1cMUsuSNQgHkWmmeb FvCKeOsNUsabPDIRrOph1io96SqbY9M= Received: from mail-pf1-f197.google.com (mail-pf1-f197.google.com [209.85.210.197]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-256-zCnYnPmwPbCGvb3vE5Nrwg-1; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:35:34 -0500 X-MC-Unique: zCnYnPmwPbCGvb3vE5Nrwg-1 Received: by mail-pf1-f197.google.com with SMTP id 9so2384073pfn.5 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:35:34 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=z982jnqmuXNIrAhimGtzkblqKSt24Z3qnI8EZ/1iDQY=; b=bcE2M6niNFOJDs6xBcCRVJDta58Sg1S6te1NqnTmJp4a6RyeQ/KwH21mpQ7C1FANun QYQmc1rmKvlR8HpInZZW18I7z8e7ZqwK04qp4jUyxOSdsvZcr4w5eki46NdnIe+t+rvw 4Tnzw6LHs5UohbfelRL7i637kWkfG2mqjPI00lYUmIN6F7SeTqm19xFI7LhmqU6Q+klt BfLGE8TgqJNisu4BMxh6EklF8AERSj2gyfAi8SvnLD1MXcBJs0tWq4auHi/ni2TolujV 42ot0bxde0mcaX54wQbkCKb2LVcrqI3KDn9idpjd8GmskUFIxysSzssCdX8cMxXjJcOS Sleg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53395ByIPElwiFWvJY3bdct+iAF6vRhQxf6Fytkoy6yCrVcVoWGf FCkCy/q/t6B+XcW48Y/y28SdvCDvGkUMg5mWeG5kGqbhTV+9/DnFkgXvL9tfNkAIoQ8KzSStV5y ySoaDwyd9K9mNYKeT+9xr95WhOza1Gw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:de86:: with SMTP id n6mr5636641pjv.214.1606426533156; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:35:33 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzAlUToijww7RFSIadHfTUIsFRgP0jROP7USN5shf1kH7HUlqvESAgcIckwBz8UQwmCwAYwNw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:de86:: with SMTP id n6mr5636628pjv.214.1606426532884; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:35:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (ip98-179-76-75.ph.ph.cox.net. [98.179.76.75]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z126sm5587671pfz.120.2020.11.26.13.35.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:35:31 -0800 (PST) References: <87h7pd6v2k.fsf@redhat.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.10; emacs 27.1 From: Jerry Snitselaar To: Lu Baolu Subject: Re: Question about domain_init (v5.3-v5.7) In-reply-to: Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:35:30 -0700 Message-ID: <87a6v3hkd9.fsf@jsnitsel.users.ipa.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jsnitsel@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Cc: stable@kernel.vger.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-BeenThere: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues for Linux IOMMU support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "iommu" Lu Baolu @ 2020-11-26 04:01 MST: > Hi Jerry, > > On 2020/11/26 4:27, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: >> Is there a reason we check the requested guest address width against >> the >> iommu's mgaw, instead of the agaw that we already know for the iommu? >> I've run into a case with a new system where the mgaw reported is 57, >> but if they set PAE to 46 instead of 52 in the bios, then sagaw reports >> the highest supported agaw is 48 and the domain_init code fails here. In > > Isn't this a platform bug? If it's too late to fix it in the BIOS, you > maybe have to add a platform specific quirk to set mgaw to the highest > supported agaw? > > Best regards, > baolu Is there somewhere you can point me to that discusses how they should be setting the mgaw? I misunderstood when I previously asked you about whether the mgaw could be a value that was greater than any of sagaw. If it is a bios issue, then they should fix it there. > >> other places like prepare_domain_attach_device, the dmar domain agaw >> gets adjusted down to the iommu agaw. The agaw of the iommu gets >> determined based off what is reported for sagaw. I'm wondering if it >> can't instead do: >> --- >> drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c >> b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c >> index 6ca5c92ef2e5..a8e41ec36d9e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c >> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c >> @@ -1862,8 +1862,8 @@ static int domain_init(struct dmar_domain *domain, struct intel_iommu *iommu, >> domain_reserve_special_ranges(domain); >> /* calculate AGAW */ >> - if (guest_width > cap_mgaw(iommu->cap)) >> - guest_width = cap_mgaw(iommu->cap); >> + if (guest_width > agaw_to_width(iommu->agaw)) >> + guest_width = agaw_to_width(iommu->agaw); >> domain->gaw = guest_width; >> adjust_width = guestwidth_to_adjustwidth(guest_width); >> agaw = width_to_agaw(adjust_width); >> -- >> 2.27.0 >> >> Thoughts? With the former code the ehci device for the ilo fails when >> trying to get a private domain. >> Thanks, >> Jerry >> _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu