From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 783D2466B5E; Fri, 7 Aug 2026 13:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786107827; cv=none; b=hOoSVEDLz95tIq4fX48f+CuXJVus6mbkH5i6Xrg6gupK3JZRaiVUwa0ypR5Ajd9MkHkdFkVMF4WaYusypSdyisuc9P2suh4ZqEkgcnb/qkawlk9cucbR2ewXEgDFuV7XbTpHyIwvB/QvQdoqeWeTkl3vX3sXzwCxWQthvYpB+8I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786107827; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SFOODg6qJhhqz/d8SgHxakbTZXTQ0q6LGAHn5/aRuTU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mVZRUsvZSQuxttEhaUBBufSa3dnmhJ2VcP80XXndHAzdKLICXU7p5LArCQbob49oLQMWwUDrxCGYUV/PrEgLRqlMCcFHybEY912X5QtlHWdtklatS5Nb2ufKThB7kjvwGn6/JSbXm/bIs0aeZFzSP3vtg49C3LBGkkZLxroV410= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=jZgVfkuo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="jZgVfkuo" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE9CF1F000E9; Fri, 7 Aug 2026 13:03:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786107807; bh=9QqKKM/ejR76i/TkpRfggSdbNj1yOKb4P01vNyYkRUs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=jZgVfkuoWf2/siK+rKc90sJnAQt9IS3OPxAuRh6EIc5QTd91l788Rnt8tZqkY0eX1 4V1fwC8Xke07dOEvJH4kYYZt+gvugXiKXdGz5s3Jt1/2YTv8XFf+3pPwa5TgRIy87h tOTUigHIwOO/5rABTOwSnFvBDxhesq9IwfDUw/PwoaE1G3A47ELaIB7XeCacIsSDyy PyFbqxUIFxAGM/63Xlcz8epDPjAFNlriiXizH5Y2/GDhHud+FPUDHlQJ3ZIrkb6HGm sOiy7Vzx6vgAVgxctx2iJ5Rbh6hpYJoJ/vzRtPUfqSEI2nVg/CcZrAxJwm0CjWUY4i tcfKhcQgz+Ztw== X-Mailer: emacs 30.2 (via feedmail 11-beta-1 I) From: Aneesh Kumar K.V To: Will Deacon Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Robin Murphy , Marek Szyprowski , Marc Zyngier , Steven Price , Suzuki K Poulose , Catalin Marinas , Jiri Pirko , Jason Gunthorpe , Mostafa Saleh , Petr Tesarik , Alexey Kardashevskiy , Dan Williams , Xu Yilun , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , Christophe Leroy , Alexander Gordeev , Gerald Schaefer , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: swiotlb: Keep the default size for protected guests In-Reply-To: References: <20260717180442.110954-18-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> <20260807092612.2202005-1-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2026 18:33:14 +0530 Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Will Deacon writes: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 02:56:12PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) wrote: >> Realm guests and protected KVM guests may require swiotlb for device DMA >> even when all system RAM is addressable by the DMA zones. >> >> Do not reduce the SWIOTLB buffer to the kmalloc-bouncing size for these >> guests, as the reduced number of slots can be exhausted during CCA guest >> operation. >> >> Fixes: 30c5e45ee2c5 ("dma-direct: make dma_direct_map_phys() honor DMA_ATTR_CC_SHARED") >> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) >> --- >> arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> index e308a7cabd12..24caaf10e755 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> @@ -339,7 +339,8 @@ void __init arch_mm_preinit(void) >> { >> unsigned int flags = SWIOTLB_VERBOSE; >> >> - if (max_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) { >> + if (!cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT) && >> + max_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) { > > Protected guests under pKVM rely on restricted DMA, so won't this just > waste memory for them? > commit 30c5e45ee2c5 ("dma-direct: make dma_direct_map_phys() honor DMA_ATTR_CC_SHARED"), which this patch fixes, has --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c @@ -339,9 +339,7 @@ void __init arch_mm_preinit(void) { unsigned int flags = SWIOTLB_VERBOSE; - if (is_realm_world() || is_protected_kvm_guest()) { - flags |= SWIOTLB_FORCE; - } else if (max_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) { + if (max_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) { /* * If no bouncing needed for ZONE_DMA, reduce the swiotlb * buffer for kmalloc() bouncing to 1MB per 1GB of RAM. The is_protected_kvm_guest() part was added by the commit e62decaf98e7 ("arm64/coco: Add pKVM as a CC platform") @@ -337,7 +339,7 @@ void __init arch_mm_preinit(void) { unsigned int flags = SWIOTLB_VERBOSE; - if (is_realm_world()) { + if (is_realm_world() || is_protected_kvm_guest()) { flags |= SWIOTLB_FORCE; } else if (max_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) { /* @@ -412,6 +414,17 @@ void dump_mem_limit(void) } } I was under the impression that there is a possibility of using swiotlb instead of restricted-dma-pool with pKVM. If that is not the case, then we could change: !cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT) && to !is_realm_world() && -aneesh