Linux Tegra architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ashish Mhetre <amhetre@nvidia.com>
To: will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, joro@8bytes.org,
	jgg@ziepe.ca, nicolinc@nvidia.com
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Tegra264 invalidation workaround
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 09:28:10 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <97b4dcc7-3ed3-47eb-ac38-51fc2dfb6480@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260609073204.1760077-1-amhetre@nvidia.com>



On 6/9/2026 1:02 PM, Ashish Mhetre wrote:
> Nvidia Tegra264 SMMUs are affected by an erratum where a TLB entry can
> survive an invalidation that races with concurrent traffic targeting
> the same entry. The hardware-recommended software workaround is to
> issue every CFGI/TLBI command (each followed by CMD_SYNC) twice.
> The second issue must execute only after the first issue's CMD_SYNC
> has completed, giving the sequence:
>
>      TLBI/CFGI ... CMD_SYNC TLBI/CFGI ... CMD_SYNC
>
> ATC_INV is not affected and must not be doubled.
>
> The erratum is not flagged by any SMMUv3 IDR/IIDR register, so it
> cannot be detected from hardware ID. Tegra264 is device-tree-only
> (no ACPI/IORT support), so detection is purely by compatible string.
>
> This series is structured as a small refactor + detect + apply
> sequence so that each step is reviewable in isolation:
>
>   1/3 Pure refactor (no functional change): lift the existing
>       force-sync conditions out of arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_add_cmd_p()
>       into a new arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_force_sync() helper, so that
>       adding another condition (in patch 3) is a one-liner.
>       Authored by Nicolin Chen.
>
>   2/3 Detect the erratum and provide the classifier. Adds the
>       ARM_SMMU_OPT_REPEAT_TLBI_CFGI per-instance option, a global
>       arm_smmu_erratum_repeat_tlbi_cfgi_key static key, and the
>       arm_smmu_erratum_cmd_needs_repeating() predicate. The static
>       key means the wrapper compiles to a single tested branch on
>       unaffected kernels.
>
>   3/3 Apply the workaround: factor arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist()
>       into a thin wrapper around __arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist()
>       that re-issues the cmdlist a second time when the predicate
>       fires; register the same condition with the batch helper so
>       full batches of CFGI/TLBI flush with sync=true; and add
>       arm_vsmmu_can_batch_cmd() so iommufd does not mix command
>       classes inside a single batch. Also documents the erratum
>       in silicon-errata.rst.
>
> The series applies cleanly on linux-next/master (base-commit below).
>
> Changes since v3:
>   - Drop the cmds->num == 0 early-return so the refactor is
>     truly "no functional change".
>   - Rename ARM_SMMU_OPT_TLBI_TWICE -> ARM_SMMU_OPT_REPEAT_TLBI_CFGI
>     and rephrase its kdoc to be hardware-agnostic.
>   - Rename arm_smmu_cmd_needs_tlbi_twice() ->
>     arm_smmu_erratum_cmd_needs_repeating() and drop the kdoc
>     above it.
>   - Replace the explicit opcode switch with a single range check
>     opcode >= CMDQ_OP_CFGI_STE && opcode < CMDQ_OP_ATC_INV.
>   - Introduce arm_smmu_erratum_repeat_tlbi_cfgi_key static key:
>     the predicate gates on it first so unaffected kernels pay
>     only a single static_branch_unlikely() check.
>   - Drop the verbose Tegra264-specific comments above
>     arm_vsmmu_can_batch_cmd() and inside the batch helper.
>   - Document the erratum in
>     Documentation/arch/arm64/silicon-errata.rst.
>   - Guard the repeat path in arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist() with
>     an n > 0 check so we never inspect cmds[0] on the bare-SYNC
>     flush emitted by arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_add_cmd_p() when the
>     next command is unsupported by the batch's pre-selected
>     cmdq.
>   - Drop the carried Reviewed-by tags now that the patch
>     shape has changed; re-review appreciated.
>
> Changes since v2:
>   - Split into a 3-patch series (refactor / detect / apply) to keep
>     each step small and bisectable.
>   - Move the classifier to arm-smmu-v3.h as static inline so the
>     iommufd file can share it.
>   - Add arm_vsmmu_can_batch_cmd() to split iommufd batches at
>     "needs repeating" transitions so the per-batch decision based
>     on the first command stays correct under mixed user input.
>   - Spell out in the commit message why detection is via DT and
>     not via IIDR/ACPI.
>
> Changes since v1:
>   - Detect the erratum from the existing "nvidia,tegra264-smmu"
>     compatible instead of adding a new property.
>   - Centralise the doubling at the CMDQ submission layer and only
>     apply it to CFGI/TLBI (not ATC_INV).
>   - Drop the binding/dtsi patches accordingly.
>
> Ashish Mhetre (2):
>    iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Detect Tegra264 erratum
>    iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Issue CFGI/TLBI twice on Tegra264
>
> Nicolin Chen (1):
>    iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Factor out CMDQ batch force-sync conditions
>
>   Documentation/arch/arm64/silicon-errata.rst   |  2 +
>   .../arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd.c     | 15 ++++-
>   drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c   | 65 +++++++++++++++----
>   drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h   | 24 +++++++
>   4 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
>
> base-commit: 7da7f07112610a520567421dd2ffcb51beaefbcc

Hi all,

A gentle reminder to review the patches and share your comments.

Thanks,
Ashish Mhetre

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-17  3:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-09  7:32 [PATCH v4 0/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Tegra264 invalidation workaround Ashish Mhetre
2026-06-09  7:32 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Factor out CMDQ batch force-sync conditions Ashish Mhetre
2026-06-09  7:32 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Detect Tegra264 erratum Ashish Mhetre
2026-06-09  7:32 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Issue CFGI/TLBI twice on Tegra264 Ashish Mhetre
2026-06-17  3:58 ` Ashish Mhetre [this message]
2026-06-17  4:54   ` [PATCH v4 0/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Tegra264 invalidation workaround Nicolin Chen
2026-06-17  8:21     ` Jon Hunter

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=97b4dcc7-3ed3-47eb-ac38-51fc2dfb6480@nvidia.com \
    --to=amhetre@nvidia.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.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