From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, joro@8bytes.org,
jean-philippe@linaro.org, miko.lenczewski@arm.com,
balbirs@nvidia.com, peterz@infradead.org, smostafa@google.com,
kevin.tian@intel.com, praan@google.com, zhangzekun11@huawei.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH rfcv1 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add arm_smmu_invs based arm_smmu_domain_inv_range()
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 15:49:23 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250827184923.GC2206304@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8c4c5aec144f65cfd1fcef2eafb395876dac97ec.1755131672.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com>
On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 06:25:38PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> +void arm_smmu_domain_inv_range(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain,
> + unsigned long iova, size_t size,
> + unsigned int granule, bool leaf)
> +{
> + struct arm_smmu_cmdq_batch cmds = {};
> + struct arm_smmu_invs *invs;
> + bool retried = false;
> + size_t i;
> +
> + /*
> + * An invalidation request must follow some IOPTE change and then load
> + * the invalidation array In the meantime, a domain attachment mutates
> + * the array and then stores an STE/CD asking SMMU HW to acquire those
> + * changed IOPTEs. In other word, these two are interdependent and can
> + * race.
> + *
> + * In a race, the RCU design (with its underlying memory barriers) can
> + * ensure the invalidations array to always get updated before loaded.
> + *
> + * smp_mb() is used here, paired with the smp_mb() following the array
> + * update in a concurrent attach, to ensure:
> + * - HW sees the new IOPTEs if it walks after STE installation
> + * - Invalidation thread sees the updated array with the new ASID.
> + *
> + * [CPU0] | [CPU1]
> + * |
> + * change IOPTEs and TLB flush: |
> + * arm_smmu_domain_inv_range() { | arm_smmu_install_new_domain_invs {
> + * ... | rcu_assign_pointer(new_invs);
> + * smp_mb(); // ensure IOPTEs | smp_mb(); // ensure new_invs
> + * ... | kfree_rcu(old_invs, rcu);
> + * // load invalidation array | }
> + * invs = rcu_dereference(); | arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev {
> + * | STE = TTB0 // read new IOPTEs
> + */
> + smp_mb();
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +again:
> + invs = rcu_dereference(smmu_domain->invs);
> +
> + /* A concurrent attachment might have changed the array. Do a respin */
> + if (unlikely(!read_trylock(&invs->rwlock)))
> + goto again;
> + /* Only one retry. Otherwise, it would soft lockup on an empty array */
> + if (!retried && unlikely(!invs->num_invs)) {
> + read_unlock(&invs->rwlock);
> + retried = true;
> + goto again;
> + }
This has missed the point, it was to not get the unless we have
ATS. Something like this:
rcu_read_lock();
while (true) {
invs = rcu_dereference(smmu_domain->invs);
/*
* Avoid locking unless ATS is being used. No ATS invalidate can
* be going on after a domain is detached.
*/
locked = false;
if (invs->has_ats || READ_ONCE(invs->old)) {
read_lock(&invs->rwlock);
if (invs->old) {
read_unlock(&invs->rwlock);
continue;
}
locked = true;
}
break;
}
num_invs = READ_ONCE(num_invs);
for (i = 0; i != num_invs; i++) {
> + case INV_TYPE_S2_VMID_S1_CLEAR:
> + /* CMDQ_OP_TLBI_S12_VMALL already flushed S1 entries */
> + if (arm_smmu_inv_size_too_big(cur->smmu, size, granule))
> + continue;
> + /* Just a single CMDQ_OP_TLBI_NH_ALL, no batching */
> + cmd.tlbi.vmid = cur->id;
> + arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmd_with_sync(cur->smmu, &cmd);
This should just stick it in the batch, the batch was already flushed:
/* The batch for S2 TLBI must be done before nested S1 ASIDs */
if (next->type == INV_TYPE_S2_VMID_S1_CLEAR)
return true;
That needs a fixup too:
/* The batch for S2 TLBI must be done before nested S1 ASIDs */
if (cur->type != INV_TYPE_S2_VMID_S1_CLEAR &&
next->type == INV_TYPE_S2_VMID_S1_CLEAR)
return true;
It makes sense to bundle all the NH_ALL into one batch if there is more
than one.
But this arm_smmu_invs_end_batch() no longer works right since the
if (refcount_read(&cur->users) == 0)
continue;
Was added..
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-27 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-14 1:25 [PATCH rfcv1 0/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce an RCU-protected invalidation array Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 1/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Clear cmds->num after arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 2/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Explicitly set smmu_domain->stage for SVA Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 3/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add an inline arm_smmu_domain_free() Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce a per-domain arm_smmu_invs array Nicolin Chen
2025-08-26 19:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-27 0:49 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-08-27 16:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-27 17:19 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-08-28 12:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-27 20:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-06 8:16 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 5/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pre-allocate a per-master invalidation array Nicolin Chen
2025-08-26 19:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-06 7:45 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 6/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Populate smmu_domain->invs when attaching masters Nicolin Chen
2025-08-27 18:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-06 7:52 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-06 8:20 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add arm_smmu_invs based arm_smmu_domain_inv_range() Nicolin Chen
2025-08-27 18:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-09-06 8:12 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-08-14 1:25 ` [PATCH rfcv1 8/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Perform per-domain invalidations using arm_smmu_invs Nicolin Chen
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=20250827184923.GC2206304@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=balbirs@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miko.lenczewski@arm.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangzekun11@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).