Re: [PATCH rc v1 1/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add ignored bits to fix STE update sequence

[Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>]

On Sun, Dec 07, 2025 at 11:35:06AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2025 at 12:09:10PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 06, 2025 at 08:37:30PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > One more change that we need is at the last equation:
> > > -		if ((unused_update[i] & target_used[i]) != target[i])
> > > +		if ((unused_update[i] & target_used[i] & ~ignored[i]) !=
> > > +		    (target[i] & ~ignored[i]))
> > > 
> > > Either side might have the ignored bits, so we have to suppress
> > > ignored on both sides, which is required in the similar routine
> > > in arm_smmu_entry_differs_in_used_bits() of the kunit code.
> > 
> > The only way ignored is set is if both sides have it set and then we
> > update the bit in the firsy cycle meaning unused_update must have the
> > final value. There is no need to mask target since it will match. Not
> > changing this line is a big part of what makes this appealing because
> > it keeps the logic straightforward, in case ignored is used we shift
> > the update always to the first cycle then everything else is the same.
> 
> The reason that I changed this is because the kunit tests failed
> in arm_smmu_entry_differs_in_used_bits() when running the nested
> cases:
...
>     # arm_smmu_v3_write_ste_test_nested_s1dssbypass_to_s1bypass: EXPECTATION FAILED at drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-test.c:92
>                    Expected arm_smmu_entry_differs_in_used_bits( test_writer->entry, entry_used_bits, test_writer->init_entry, ignored, 8) && arm_smmu_entry_differs_in_used_bits( test_writer->entry, entry_used_bits, test_writer->target_entry, ignored, 8) to be false, but is true

I think I figured it out. The driver one has included ignored bits
from target in unused_update[]. But the kunit one is comparing the
raw value.

So, we don't need to change the driver one as you remarked, but we
do need to mask the target[] in the kunit one:

@@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ static bool arm_smmu_entry_differs_in_used_bits(const __le64 *entry,
        unsigned int i;

        for (i = 0; i < length; i++) {
-               if ((entry[i] & used_bits[i]) != target[i])
+               __le64 used = used_bits[i] & ~ignored[i];
+
+               if ((entry[i] & used) != (target[i] & used))
                        differs = true;
        }
        return differs;

I will wrap up v2 and send it today.

Thanks
Nicolin