From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com (mail-wm1-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0405F3AA9EF for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 20:44:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787345097; cv=none; b=D1mQc8CYVzaQacC49cTMPmJuQQ3DAbLPMB7VtvSGg+cNlhQ09Fc5aHw55BuDU3gpnotqHo9dO8lHypbdvkPBcLC1FadpjQ/Mi/fSSdclbYC9+ebJOuFpqdZZJ1tse9QuXbt3vSjI8Oc8GK5CYL0h/farP3JgekDt2dssZBL4wyE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787345097; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VLZNTb6sD+keLS3qr1GL0XKLbH4bPo17f2sE+RknAB8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=SOczuuY6GplZYuWr/SuGDfm+hFtWJ5IY1yC17x+V7hzHnIVnofzqLA3aTh/asORs8Ygz615merB5dvxGsg67AI+QJNM+EeWR/M2kve7mVUYz1TIn35ft6JpVSNgW1zA9RwBgKWhiHMN4fWRwwpdWRps6UEhJaTxvY/e5L0V0Bao= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=rMifa0PC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="rMifa0PC" Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4980dc26022so10945335e9.1 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:44:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1787345094; x=1787949894; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=QzsO6bXfVkXRG/aUxfAmIkKsE+Fa964GVFQS62WZABw=; b=rMifa0PCHWWAOMbDYxt2tHhqUbMomTuW8+jgafuwJXBhighmxFjgDBbPjWTGR5jYko jt8+LVYr4gUtV2mD4L0IbyThp89GZ9rbLjMP5A6+pfPguWWnOisWEaDDaC8lZNRFVo9S 3/NORycOSX2LqQI3q5gnPy9pojVhM6yJl/5ji+aPyhSXR1BuJziZONjsDGdV/Jxg8eNP VBPzgIZxWFTDbdY5XKqUzsdaFvKi70cduOY2/wo7OgFVe0rM5YcyW1KzZcE5VQQg4vmO kKtGeAUBCsApgixVtzVtXv4xPsgedgaflDFq1kBXu8afT53KpKkzxZbEdDLiXRqrhbas Cc2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1787345094; x=1787949894; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=QzsO6bXfVkXRG/aUxfAmIkKsE+Fa964GVFQS62WZABw=; b=DT2sJ5i9MIP0W+tMuuFoRUEu4BordJuwjmm/AmyAI0rIJfWjnyEj8OikfIb8+vBRvz oxeq6McCZu5ZHShjU70UXKVa4SwPNNvovfCWwv9u+IqtAUAw/RGABbK+V5MyInd26Kl2 KPn6zhta6j6RkNjkGBms7HRektCWspWg7Y5RastvCLaPXqyM8pTgnpRYthA9w4oiTWng c0oL6tFzs/ZPxmHaBObLuWuT+IEuJOT0yXrzOOtM7MM9K4MgbzqiBzBJLPBVUddYsNvS vxjVtrpTdBAph5HL5lqZbNqeEA9A6PxQeXrlP5UYbF3nNYlO8+bA8HOxGKEoNrda4Ohv Yz8Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+Rre9VPWZGF3mtABCkHZI5rG9sy+A0pe1DkX0tPFVgf9CQjPt9MYY2iOe2c/jbQvDC9W8YD3sA==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++nXiTzhfmDRu87rMM5uHBCnyRLCzATq59xbh0vD5CXze6CkGFM3 e7mZO4MFuXxGAD1Dpa+Wec2wF1XM1wuiz8qNjk8CoQv6geazExJWzby0MZ0yjYq5GQ== X-Gm-Gg: AR+sD11Lg40azLMuz1xMRcb+oKUNkd468+sIfgP5c00xELRrAZAKXjIGU4A+Vw90OgQ j8Rxl01c+Yc11KvB91F6veYPpVWihYuQqXcJxi+3iJkMLOLiRmn9fZyE/g3yQ68aZuvSrXeVELJ CT02WNu2gzobIKpquznnqPY3tj4hrTl3IXtenMYZFvsdd/RGSLRhmP82rBg8B839UrFnIAJ+vGg WnWzccl9TMjgGscZPvoAlNKzkiJmeqUfLWKRjpd0x+SJSY5ezDW9fJjPAEkaiX+YaKwUUqOWyye HvvPp8//FCNxEWSci4JF43v4Yjtn2Iz1JZivS8nvhlFpVdzlmSEeHpTXqtGQ03VFB000uhKFeYi z55SeH32sZ3mrrCryjaQa5djL4WRfuEU8rOFDmVcC95nc0LIDWQCA8eiEw5ci2LEV+5d1RjR4WJ Up6b/GyP6Oa/LOWpIioy7+5+BQPKVuEySYZ/vgSaKh5q9ru2KAzXxSZl5FLX3pPx5Bkvig9+hB2 kdN2cH/jSVQvOJLmNgx3wzQdLoknNYi X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:548c:b0:499:8aff:59b6 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-499c19f514emr11324295e9.14.1787345093778; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (135.91.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.91.135]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-499b911584bsm40454845e9.14.2026.08.21.13.44.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 21:44:49 +0100 From: Vincent Donnefort To: Thierry Reding Cc: Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Jonathan Hunter , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , Sowjanya Komatineni , Luca Ceresoli , Mikko Perttunen , Yury Norov , Rasmus Villemoes , Russell King , Alexander Gordeev , Gerald Schaefer , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Andrew Morton , David Hildenbrand , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R. Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Marek Szyprowski , Robin Murphy , Sumit Semwal , Benjamin Gaignard , Brian Starkey , John Stultz , "T.J. Mercier" , Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , Steven Rostedt , Masami Hiramatsu , Mathieu Desnoyers , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Chun Ng , Thierry Reding , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thierry Reding , pavan.kondeti@oss.qualcomm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/10] dma-buf: heaps: Add support for Tegra VPR Message-ID: References: <20260807-tegra-vpr-v4-0-5510d16af89e@nvidia.com> <20260807-tegra-vpr-v4-7-5510d16af89e@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: [...] > > > Interesting. I had been thinking more along the lines of adding this > > > directly into memblock using a new entry in enum memblock_flags. None of > > > the existing ones seem to do what we need here, though some are closely > > > related. MEMBLOCK_SECURE or MEMBLOCK_PROTECTED are quite specific and > > > don't necessarily mean that we need the mapping to be page-granular, so > > > MEMBLOCK_PAGE_GRANULAR is perhaps clearer. > > > > I thought it would be interesting to not have to modify memblock since it is > > used for all architectures, while the DT is at least slightly less widespread. > > This isn't something that is DT specific. On the Tegra side, I suspect > we might need this on ACPI platforms eventually, too. And it's not an > ARM specific feature either. Other platforms could use shared carveouts, > too. Agreed, and actually I have tried the memblock version and it looks quite neat! I will share what I have after the merge-window. > > > Also, cma_init_reserved_mem() could use an order 9. In that case PTE-level isn't > > necessary and we could just use PMD-level. Extending that support would be more > > cumbersome with a memblock flag than with a callback. > > > > rmem_cma_setup() hardcoding an order 0, perhaps this isn't really a problem at > > the moment? > > How so? memblock is really just used as a way of backing the CMA. How > CMA subdivides it doesn't really matter, right? > > Or are you suggesting that if we use an entire PMD as granularity, we > could equally well remove the entire PMD from the linear mapping instead > of doing it page-by-page? I think that'd work really well for at least > VPR, since it is 1 MiB aligned anyway. Using a granularity of 2 MiB is > easily doable. Yes, that is what I meant. We could easily force a PMD-level mapping instead of PTE-level one. But then that means declaring another memblock flag. > > For anything that doesn't require a single contiguous area to be > protected this might be a bit more challenging since it potentially > wastes a lot of memory. On the other hand, a lot of this is heavily > custom code anyway, so the entire stack could be modified to make > efficient use of this (i.e. userspace could allocate a larger chunk > for a pool of buffers, etc.). > > > But yeah, the alternative is to create a "memblock_mark_forcepte" (it seems > > memblock_setclr_flag does split memblocks) and let of_reserved_mem call that > > function. Finally the arm64 mmu code can simply check for the flag before > > calling __map_memblock. Perhaps it isn't that bad in the end? > > It sounds like the right level of abstraction to me. But I'm not too > familiar with this code, so it'd be good to hear from the MM and/or ARM > maintainers what they think about this. > > [...] > > I had in mind to extend "shared-dma-pool" to handle > > set_direct_map_invalid_noflush()/set_direct_map_default_noflush() based on an > > option. But perhaps it is better to create another separate driver. And VPR > > needing a specific dma-heap driver anyway, it could call the direct-map > > functions there too without relying on CMA to do anything? > > I think it'd be nice to have separate APIs for this case where we know > the memory region is already page-granular (or, I suppose, PMD granular) > and removing from (or adding back to) the linear mapping is safe. That > way we could avoid the checks for can_set_direct_map() for each page. > > It'd also be nice to have a version that can update the protection bits > for a range of pages (would map directly to update_range_prot()) instead > of having to manually iterate over each page in a range. > How about? /* True if can_set_direct_map() or [start, end) is mapped at PTE-level */ can_set_direct_map_range(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end); /* Must check can_set_direct_map() or can_set_direct_map_range() first */ __set_direct_map_invalid_noflush(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end) __set_direct_map_default_noflush(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end) > A good middle-ground might be to have helpers that do the grunt work and > they can then be called from VPR and the shared-dma-pool drivers to have > pages removed from the linear mapping. VPR and similar can then perform > the hardware protection bits on top of that. I believe between the reserved-memory attribute to force the last-level mappings and the direct map functions above, there's enough for the VPR driver? -- Vincent > > Thierry