From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41hMp42TLfzF2F1 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 06:53:16 +1000 (AEST) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 23:53:08 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Will Deacon , Anshuman Khandual , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, aik@ozlabs.ru, robh@kernel.org, joe@perches.com, elfring@users.sourceforge.net, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au, jasowang@redhat.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, linuxram@us.ibm.com, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com, jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Virtio uses DMA API for all devices Message-ID: <20180802235233-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20180720035941.6844-1-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180727095804.GA25592@arm.com> <20180730093414.GD26245@infradead.org> <20180730125100-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180730111802.GA9830@infradead.org> <20180730155633-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180731173052.GA17153@infradead.org> <3d6e81511571260de1c8047aaffa8ac4df093d2e.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <20180802003823-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <7779442d7889ee943b3e4ff6c63ec90b4a58b79d.camel@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <7779442d7889ee943b3e4ff6c63ec90b4a58b79d.camel@kernel.crashing.org> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 10:33:05AM -0500, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 00:56 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > but it's not, VMs are > > > created in "legacy" mode all the times and we don't know at VM creation > > > time whether it will become a secure VM or not. The way our secure VMs > > > work is that they start as a normal VM, load a secure "payload" and > > > call the Ultravisor to "become" secure. > > > > > > So we're in a bit of a bind here. We need that one-liner optional arch > > > hook to make virtio use swiotlb in that "IOMMU bypass" case. > > > > > > Ben. > > > > And just to make sure I understand, on your platform DMA APIs do include > > some of the cache flushing tricks and this is why you don't want to > > declare iommu support in the hypervisor? > > I'm not sure I parse what you mean. > > We don't need cache flushing tricks. You don't but do real devices on same platform need them? > The problem we have with our > "secure" VMs is that: > > - At VM creation time we have no idea it's going to become a secure > VM, qemu doesn't know anything about it, and thus qemu (or other > management tools, libvirt etc...) are going to create "legacy" (ie > iommu bypass) virtio devices. > > - Once the VM goes secure (early during boot but too late for qemu), > it will need to make virtio do bounce-buffering via swiotlb because > qemu cannot physically access most VM pages (blocked by HW security > features), we need to bounce buffer using some unsecure pages that are > accessible to qemu. > > That said, I wouldn't object for us to more generally switch long run > to changing qemu so that virtio on powerpc starts using the IOMMU as a > default provided we fix our guest firmware to understand it (it > currently doesn't), and provided we verify that the performance impact > on things like vhost is negligible. > > Cheers, > Ben. >