From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A52FC433DF for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:28:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7776E206C0 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:28:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387513AbgF3R20 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:28:26 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:57664 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725872AbgF3R2Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:28:25 -0400 IronPort-SDR: Nmkk3N//AC0X3k+hiW2X4zMPymTWirWOy6Jf4s2zOEs7g2P665Rk9Zjqk7e7tgKT1LnTB0Vqnq cgwKMelKULag== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9668"; a="145389860" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,298,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="145389860" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Jun 2020 10:28:25 -0700 IronPort-SDR: iic3PxhGJrZzMZYF5AwBTrPWKPYtdK4G0iPGGe2A6J+qfv6LgmwGkl419RUyX7A2ZrQIO75+Ds 5vmxmwbb6IwQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,298,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="277496676" Received: from jacob-builder.jf.intel.com (HELO jacob-builder) ([10.7.199.155]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Jun 2020 10:28:24 -0700 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:34:59 -0700 From: Jacob Pan To: Lu Baolu Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, LKML , Joerg Roedel , David Woodhouse , Yi Liu , "Tian, Kevin" , Raj Ashok , Eric Auger , jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] iommu/vt-d: Warn on out-of-range invalidation address Message-ID: <20200630103459.6c99c961@jacob-builder> In-Reply-To: References: <1592926996-47914-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1592926996-47914-7-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> Organization: OTC X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:10:43 +0800 Lu Baolu wrote: > Hi, > > On 2020/6/23 23:43, Jacob Pan wrote: > > For guest requested IOTLB invalidation, address and mask are > > provided as part of the invalidation data. VT-d HW silently ignores > > any address bits below the mask. SW shall also allow such case but > > give warning if address does not align with the mask. This patch > > relax the fault handling from error to warning and proceed with > > invalidation request with the given mask. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan > > --- > > drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 7 +++---- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c > > b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c index 5ea5732d5ec4..50fc62413a35 > > 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c > > @@ -5439,13 +5439,12 @@ intel_iommu_sva_invalidate(struct > > iommu_domain *domain, struct device *dev, > > switch (BIT(cache_type)) { > > case IOMMU_CACHE_INV_TYPE_IOTLB: > > + /* HW will ignore LSB bits based on > > address mask */ if (inv_info->granularity == IOMMU_INV_GRANU_ADDR && > > size && > > (inv_info->addr_info.addr & > > ((BIT(VTD_PAGE_SHIFT + size)) - 1))) { > > - pr_err_ratelimited("Address out of > > range, 0x%llx, size order %llu\n", > > - > > inv_info->addr_info.addr, size); > > - ret = -ERANGE; > > - goto out_unlock; > > + WARN_ONCE(1, "Address out of > > range, 0x%llx, size order %llu\n", > > + > > inv_info->addr_info.addr, size); > > I don't think WARN_ONCE() is suitable here. It makes users think it's > a kernel bug. How about pr_warn_ratelimited()? > I think pr_warn_ratelimited might still be too chatty. There is no functional issues, we just don't to silently ignore it. Perhaps just say: WARN_ONCE(1, "User provided address not page aligned, alignment forced") ? > Best regards, > baolu > > > } > > > > /* > > [Jacob Pan]