From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Renato Machelett <renato@machelett.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, robin.murphy@arm.com, joro@8bytes.org
Subject: Re: iommu/dma: SATA RMRR reservation omission in shared group on HP Gen8
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 15:27:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea131a99-d3f0-4d52-a076-d80d84d690e8@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <02b201dd5ea3$02b88430$08298c90$@machelett.com>
On 10/18/2026 9:50 AM, Renato Machelett wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am hitting a recurring DMA PTE collision issue on an HP ProLiant DL320e Gen8 v2 (Xeon E3-1230 v3, Intel C222 Lynx Point PCH, BIOS P80 tested with both 03/28/2014 and 04/04/2019) on Ubuntu 24.04 with 6.8.0-146-generic. In Ubuntu's 6.8.0-147-generic source, drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c is byte-identical.
>
> On Ubuntu Launchpad, bug 2160616 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2160616) reported the same 0xf1f7e collisions on HP Gen8 hardware and was marked as a duplicate of bug 2158934 (the PCIe ACS quirk regression reverted in 6.8.0-136.136). However, 6.8.0-146 already contains that ACS revert and still reproduces these collisions with intel_iommu=on, because on the Intel C222 PCH 00:1f.0 (LPC bridge, 8086:8c4e) and 00:1f.2 (AHCI SATA controller, 8086:8c02) are multifunction siblings without ACS hardware and share IOMMU group 8:
>
> pci 0000:00:1f.0: Adding to iommu group 8
> pci 0000:00:1f.2: Adding to iommu group 8
>
> The ProLiant DMAR table defines 23 pages of RMRR (0xf1f7e000-0xf1f94fff) scoped to 00:1f.2 (SATA), but not to 00:1f.0 (LPC).
>
> My source analysis points to drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c (matching the Oct 2024 thread at https://lists.openwall.net/linux-kernel/2024/10/24/1195):
> 1. During bus probing (bus_iommu_probe -> iommu_setup_default_domain, drivers/iommu/iommu.c:2014, :3150), iommu_create_device_direct_mappings() installs 00:1f.2's 23 identity PTEs (0xf1f7e003..0xf1f94003) into group 8's hardware IOMMU page table.
> 2. When bus_iommu_probe() finalizes group 8 in member order (00:1f.0 first, 00:1f.2 second), iommu_dma_init_domain() (drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c:701-727) initializes iovad->start_pfn and calls iova_reserve_iommu_regions() for 00:1f.0 (which has no RMRRs), then takes the already-initialized iovad->start_pfn early return (lines 701-713) for 00:1f.2 without reserving 00:1f.2's RMRRs in the IOVA allocator.
> 3. Because iommu_dma_alloc_iova() prefers allocations below 4 GiB (pci_32bit_workaround), ordinary ahci disk I/O can allocate these unreserved vPFNs (0xf1f7e..0xf1f94):
>
> DMAR: ERROR: DMA PTE for vPFN 0xf1f7e already set (to f1f7e003 not 11f04e003)
> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 2210 at drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c:2227 __domain_mapping+0x2b5/0x320
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> intel_iommu_map_pages+0xe1/0x140
> __iommu_map+0x121/0x280
> iommu_map_sg+0xbf/0x1f0
> iommu_dma_map_sg+0x463/0x4f0
> __dma_map_sg_attrs+0x35/0xd0
> dma_map_sg_attrs+0xe/0x30
> ata_qc_issue+0x131/0x320
>
> 4. In __domain_mapping() (drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c:2218), cmpxchg64_local(&pte->val, 0ULL, pteval) sees the pre-existing RMRR identity PTE (0xf1f7e003) and logs the warning, but does not fail the mapping, leaving the identity translation in place. A subsequent DMA transfer could therefore access the RMRR page instead of the intended RAM buffer (I also observed cached ext4 inode checksum errors on this host, though I have not proven the completed DMA link directly). Subsequent DMA unmapping in dma_pte_clear_level() (drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c:1097) calls dma_clear_pte(), clearing the covered identity PTE so repeated allocations at that vPFN need not produce another warning.
>
> Separately, when testing Ubuntu Noble HWE 7.0.0-38-generic on the same host, drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c still has the same initialized-domain early return before per-device reservation, and I also observed immediate VT-d faults during boot ("DMAR: [DMA Write NO_PASID] Request device [00:1f.2] fault addr 0xf4c00000 [fault reason 0x0c] non-zero reserved fields in PTE", CAP=0xd2008c20660462, ECAP=0xf010da) followed by ATA Emask 0x40 (AC_ERR_SYSTEM) failures. This kernel uses drivers/iommu/generic_pt/fmt/vtdss.h, whose permission handling in vtdss_pt_iommu_set_prot() differs from the legacy implementation (no longer OR'ing bit 0 on IOMMU_WRITE), though I have not established which specific PTE field caused the 0x0c fault.
>
> I am currently running with intel_iommu=off as a workaround. Is there an existing fix or backport for this shared-group reservation omission?
Thank you for the report. This issue still appears to exist in the
latest upstream kernel:
static int iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct
device *dev)
{
...
/* start_pfn is always nonzero for an already-initialised domain */
if (iovad->start_pfn) {
if (1UL << order != iovad->granule ||
base_pfn != iovad->start_pfn) {
pr_warn("Incompatible range for DMA domain\n");
return -EFAULT;
}
return 0;
}
...
}
The early return is still there. Have you tried reserving the second
device's RMRR in the IOVA allocator as well? Something like:
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
index 68ee57800fef..e9b39009f109 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
@@ -704,7 +704,7 @@ static int iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain
*domain, struct device *dev
return -EFAULT;
}
- return 0;
+ return iova_reserve_iommu_regions(dev, domain);
}
init_iova_domain(iovad, 1UL << order, base_pfn);
This would at least confirm your analysis.
Thanks,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-19 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-18 1:50 iommu/dma: SATA RMRR reservation omission in shared group on HP Gen8 Renato Machelett
2026-10-19 7:27 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2026-10-19 10:46 ` Renato Machelett
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=ea131a99-d3f0-4d52-a076-d80d84d690e8@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com \
--cc=renato@machelett.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.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