From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>,
Zhu Tony <tony.zhu@intel.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 07/17] iommu: Try to allocate blocking domain when probing device
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:49:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c46ec383-bd51-1d78-ff81-0bee064ce1cb@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yw4Qzif8W53ykR6K@nvidia.com>
On 8/30/22 9:29 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:46:01AM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
>> On 2022/8/30 01:27, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 11:40:24AM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
>>>> On 2022/8/26 22:52, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 08:11:31PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>>>>>> Allocate the blocking domain when probing devices if the driver supports
>>>>>> blocking domain allocation. Otherwise, revert to the previous behavior,
>>>>>> that is, use UNMANAGED domain instead when the blocking domain is needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>>>>>> Tested-by: Zhangfei Gao<zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>
>>>>>> Tested-by: Tony Zhu<tony.zhu@intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>>> This seems like a lot of overhead to allocate these things for every
>>>>> group?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not add a simple refcount on the blocking domain instead and
>>>>> allocate the domain on the pasid attach like we do for ownership?
>>>>
>>>> I am working towards implementing static instance of blocking domain for
>>>> each IOMMU driver, and then, there's no much overhead to allocate it in
>>>> the probing device path.
>>>
>>> Well, I thought about that and I don't think we can get
>>> there in a short order.
>>
>> Yes. Fair enough.
>>
>>> Would rather you progress this series without
>>> getting entangled in such a big adventure
>>
>> Agreed. I will drop this patch and add below code in the iommu
>> interface:
>>
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> @@ -3219,6 +3219,26 @@ int iommu_attach_device_pasid(struct iommu_domain
>> *domain,
>> return -ENODEV;
>>
>> mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * The underlying IOMMU driver needs to support blocking domain
>> + * allocation and the callback to block DMA transactions with a
>> + * specific PASID.
>> + */
>> + if (!group->blocking_domain) {
>> + group->blocking_domain = __iommu_domain_alloc(dev->bus,
>> + IOMMU_DOMAIN_BLOCKED);
>> + if (!group->blocking_domain) {
>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>> + goto out_unlock;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (!group->blocking_domain->ops->set_dev_pasid) {
>> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + goto out_unlock;
>> + }
>> +
>> curr = xa_cmpxchg(&group->pasid_array, pasid, NULL, domain,
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (curr) {
>> ret = xa_err(curr) ? : -EBUSY;
>>
>> Currently both ARM SMMUv3 and VT-d drivers use static blocking domain.
>> Hence I didn't use a refcount for blocking domain release here.
>
> I don't think that works in the general case, you can't just destroy
> what is in group->blocking_domain..
If I understand you correctly, we can't just free the blocking domain
and forget about whether this domain is still set on any device?
>
> Maybe all of this is just the good reason to go to a simple
> device->ops->remove_dev_pasid() callback and forget about blocking
> domain here.
Do you mean rolling back to what we did in v10?
--- a/include/linux/iommu.h
+++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
@@ -262,6 +262,8 @@ struct iommu_ops {
* struct iommu_domain_ops - domain specific operations
* @attach_dev: attach an iommu domain to a device
* @detach_dev: detach an iommu domain from a device
+ * @set_dev_pasid: set an iommu domain to a pasid of device
+ * @block_dev_pasid: block pasid of device from using iommu domain
* @map: map a physically contiguous memory region to an iommu domain
* @map_pages: map a physically contiguous set of pages of the same
size to
* an iommu domain.
@@ -282,6 +284,10 @@ struct iommu_ops {
struct iommu_domain_ops {
int (*attach_dev)(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device *dev);
void (*detach_dev)(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device
*dev);
+ int (*set_dev_pasid)(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device
*dev,
+ ioasid_t pasid);
+ void (*block_dev_pasid)(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct
device *dev,
+ ioasid_t pasid);
Best regards,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-31 1:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-26 12:11 [PATCH v12 00/17] iommu: SVA and IOPF refactoring Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 01/17] iommu: Add max_pasids field in struct iommu_device Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 02/17] iommu: Add max_pasids field in struct dev_iommu Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 03/17] iommu: Remove SVM_FLAG_SUPERVISOR_MODE support Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 04/17] PCI: Enable PASID only when ACS RR & UF enabled on upstream path Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 05/17] iommu: Add attach/detach_dev_pasid iommu interface Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-28 12:52 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 06/17] iommu: Add IOMMU SVA domain support Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 07/17] iommu: Try to allocate blocking domain when probing device Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:52 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-29 3:40 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-29 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-30 1:46 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-30 13:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-31 1:49 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2022-08-31 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-01 10:44 ` Baolu Lu
2022-09-02 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 08/17] iommu: Make free of iommu_domain_ops optional Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-26 14:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 09/17] iommu/vt-d: Add blocking domain support Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-28 12:55 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 10/17] iommu/vt-d: Add SVA " Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 11/17] arm-smmu-v3: Add blocking " Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 12/17] arm-smmu-v3/sva: Add SVA " Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 14:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-28 13:57 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-29 17:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-30 2:04 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 13/17] iommu/sva: Refactoring iommu_sva_bind/unbind_device() Lu Baolu
2022-08-30 7:30 ` Yuan Can
2022-08-30 7:45 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-30 7:46 ` Baolu Lu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 14/17] iommu: Remove SVA related callbacks from iommu ops Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 15/17] iommu: Prepare IOMMU domain for IOPF Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 16/17] iommu: Per-domain I/O page fault handling Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 12:11 ` [PATCH v12 17/17] iommu: Rename iommu-sva-lib.{c,h} Lu Baolu
2022-08-26 15:50 ` [PATCH v12 00/17] iommu: SVA and IOPF refactoring Jason Gunthorpe
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=c46ec383-bd51-1d78-ff81-0bee064ce1cb@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=tony.zhu@intel.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=zhangfei.gao@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).