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 C2A083AB496; Mon, 10 Aug 2026 09:29:54 +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=1786354195; cv=none; b=pNja+PzHDVktWJlMIMxb0+fWXQ+41bE54nBzmaHGxGhTdPTXAWw4VVnK6ezup4q+fZGtSLozWQyt5LdK1icYzMvTVyWC9vjoU/eBDLOEosIgOMq3fjhCtSILb/8ggGQpo50odtYymbqEcaDBNCuXeSHdq+/7BFVzdmNJ2A1gAOY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786354195; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ePzJdMR5XS4l0T+U+JwL7EAJw0TvLA27eLAbg0PvUSg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JHHCE7Nm6zlzLm1mEbvA1bfnVH0cxCvjV3RgWyzATSmM0tycZL3a/8naT31Vi3Q6SAh10d+elzxU+vuWPgdeqySKSC/AfVPieGj2vzPE/zNKrLMbXT/IF/w440ea4yKeKmtT3B+t2fUhGT4NP9sUosHXKyAShgQ0DH0gxhn0N7c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EOZ5btVK; 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="EOZ5btVK" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 61A721F00A3F; Mon, 10 Aug 2026 09:29:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786354194; bh=ePzJdMR5XS4l0T+U+JwL7EAJw0TvLA27eLAbg0PvUSg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=EOZ5btVK5wc2PRm7y+pa82bf3EF9Q2evs44jC9f7gpN6kM6uHUCiuwM/CQt4buzLp DvHbec2P6GdoqL8LuZU/Gp2huwKC6TNH1usgp+1qSI0OPhXP+jlNLEvRYgs4rrvLZj l6SC7NOcbBVPs0B/jDmCJ5lndL9VLQZant1O86GzzUwTAgB31/rfQ4jUTM6GwATKT2 v3632dOTCea49nhxBk+pLY5vDnGLk1o+g/UNwr4OcDX9GQH6d3QaJY1fkwdush9HYo vxAF5lClYDTXMP/FeWosYTJwRJDLhO850dR/2D38G+l2Vjw3KjfDR12j3puAsWRWj5 EzAp8I7p17uYA== X-Mailer: emacs 30.2 (via feedmail 11-beta-1 I) From: Aneesh Kumar K.V To: Marek Szyprowski , Jason Gunthorpe , Mostafa Saleh Cc: Will Deacon , iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Robin Murphy , Marc Zyngier , Steven Price , Suzuki K Poulose , Catalin Marinas , Jiri Pirko , 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: <7d22482f-d5fd-4cf4-9d32-6a54e02f2fbb@samsung.com> References: <20260717180442.110954-18-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> <20260807092612.2202005-1-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> <20260807135810.GA200537@ziepe.ca> <20260807164734.GE200537@ziepe.ca> <20260807182017.GH200537@ziepe.ca> <7d22482f-d5fd-4cf4-9d32-6a54e02f2fbb@samsung.com> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 14:59:42 +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 Marek Szyprowski writes: > On 07.08.2026 20:20, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 06:13:49PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote: >>> But the whole thing is best effort anyway, the kernel picks >>> IO_TLB_DEFAULT_SIZE which does not depend on the system topology or >>> how many devices or how much DMA they do. >>> SWIOTLB memory is wasted if unused so we should be careful around >>> that as it would be the other way around and users would have to >>> decrease it manually. >> Yeah, it is why the arch code shouldn't really be sizing it directly, >> it should be done in common code and, yes, we are probably going to >> have to do something alot smarter to have the common code better >> auto-tune this for the CC case.. > > What about the $subject patch? I assume that it is still needed to > > restore the behavior that was altered by the "[PATCH v8 00/23] > > dma-mapping: Track shared DMA state through direct, pool and swiotlb > > paths?" patchset? > I would request that we pick this patch to fix the regression described in https://lore.kernel.org/all/yq5azeyxyfol.fsf@kernel.org/. We can then work separately on improving the default swiotlb pool size in generic code based on other metrics. I consider this patch independent of that work. Even with such an improvement, this patch would still be applicable: a condition that resizes the swiotlb pool based on arm64_dma_phys_limit should not apply when guest memory encryption is in use, because the purpose of the swiotlb pool is different in that configuration. -aneesh