From: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com,
hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com,
gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com, agordeev@linux.ibm.com,
svens@linux.ibm.com, joro@8bytes.org, will@kernel.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, jgg@nvidia.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] iommu/s390: Fix potential s390_domain aperture shrinking
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 17:21:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed96bbb5b2af7cbf8e41f5aa36d31d3f5aae50d5.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221006144700.3380098-4-schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, 2022-10-06 at 16:46 +0200, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> The s390 IOMMU driver currently sets the IOMMU domain's aperture to
> match the device specific DMA address range of the device that is first
> attached. This is not ideal. For one if the domain has no device
> attached in the meantime the aperture could be shrunk allowing
> translations outside the aperture to exist in the translation tables.
> Also this is a bit of a misuse of the aperture which really should
> describe what addresses can be translated and not some device specific
> limitations.
>
> Instead of misusing the aperture like this we can instead create
> reserved ranges for the ranges inaccessible to the attached devices
> allowing devices with overlapping ranges to still share an IOMMU domain.
> This also significantly simplifies s390_iommu_attach_device() allowing
> us to move the aperture check to the beginning of the function and
> removing the need to hold the device list's lock to check the aperture.
>
> As we then use the same aperture for all domains and it only depends on
> the table properties we can already check zdev->start_dma/end_dma at
> probe time and turn the check on attach into a WARN_ON().
>
> Suggested-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
@Matt, @Jason I did drop the R-b's here because the change Jason
suggested of changing the aperture check on attach to a WARN_ON() and
checking zdev->start_dma/end_dma on probe is a behavioral change.
> ---
> v4->v5:
> - Make aperture check in attach a WARN_ON() and fail in probe if
> zdev->start_dma/end_dma doesn't git in aperture (Jason)
>
> drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
> index 9b3ae4b14636..1f6c9bee9a80 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
---8<---
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-06 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-06 14:46 [PATCH v5 0/6] iommu/s390: Fixes related to attach and aperture handling Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 14:46 ` [PATCH v5 1/6] iommu/s390: Fix duplicate domain attachments Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 21:02 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-10-07 6:55 ` Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-07 11:20 ` Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 14:46 ` [PATCH v5 2/6] iommu/s390: Get rid of s390_domain_device Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 15:19 ` Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 14:46 ` [PATCH v5 3/6] iommu/s390: Fix potential s390_domain aperture shrinking Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 15:21 ` Niklas Schnelle [this message]
2022-10-06 21:02 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-10-07 7:37 ` Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 14:46 ` [PATCH v5 4/6] iommu/s390: Fix incorrect aperture check Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 14:46 ` [PATCH v5 5/6] iommu/s390: Fix incorrect pgsize_bitmap Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 14:47 ` [PATCH v5 6/6] iommu/s390: Implement map_pages()/unmap_pages() instead of map()/unmap() Niklas Schnelle
2022-10-06 21:03 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-10-07 6:59 ` Niklas Schnelle
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=ed96bbb5b2af7cbf8e41f5aa36d31d3f5aae50d5.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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