Re: [PATCH v7 3/9] docs: x86: Add documentation for SVA (Shared Virtual Addressing)

Randy Dunlap
2020-09-05T17:55:27Z

Hi,

I'll add a few edits other than those that Borislav made.
(nice review job, BP)

On 8/27/20 8:06 AM, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
>
> ENQCMD and Data Streaming Accelerator (DSA) and all of their associated
> features are a complicated stack with lots of interconnected pieces.
> This documentation provides a big picture overview for all of the
> features.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
> Co-developed-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
> ---
> v7:
> - Change the doc for updating PASID by IPI and context switch (Andy).
>
> v3:
> - Replace deprecated intel_svm_bind_mm() by iommu_sva_bind_mm() (Baolu)
> - Fix a couple of typos (Baolu)
>
> v2:
> - Fix the doc format and add the doc in toctree (Thomas)
> - Modify the doc for better description (Thomas, Tony, Dave)
>
> Documentation/x86/index.rst | 1 +
> Documentation/x86/sva.rst | 254 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 255 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/x86/sva.rst

> diff --git a/Documentation/x86/sva.rst b/Documentation/x86/sva.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..6e7ac565e127
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/x86/sva.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,254 @@
> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +===========================================
> +Shared Virtual Addressing (SVA) with ENQCMD
> +===========================================
> +
> +Background
> +==========
> +

...

> +
> +Shared Hardware Workqueues
> +==========================
> +
> +Unlike Single Root I/O Virtualization (SRIOV), Scalable IOV (SIOV) permits
> +the use of Shared Work Queues (SWQ) by both applications and Virtual
> +Machines (VM's). This allows better hardware utilization vs. hard
> +partitioning resources that could result in under utilization. In order to
> +allow the hardware to distinguish the context for which work is being
> +executed in the hardware by SWQ interface, SIOV uses Process Address Space
> +ID (PASID), which is a 20bit number defined by the PCIe SIG.

20-bit

> +
> +PASID value is encoded in all transactions from the device. This allows the
> +IOMMU to track I/O on a per-PASID granularity in addition to using the PCIe
> +Resource Identifier (RID) which is the Bus/Device/Function.
> +
> +
> +ENQCMD
> +======
> +

...

> +
> +Process Address Space Tagging
> +=============================
> +

...

> +
> +PASID Management
> +================
> +

...

> +
> +Relationships
> +=============
> +
> + * Each process has many threads, but only one PASID

(end with) PASID.

> + * Devices have a limited number (~10's to 1000's) of hardware
> + workqueues and each portal maps down to a single workqueue.
> + The device driver manages allocating hardware workqueues.
> + * A single mmap() maps a single hardware workqueue as a "portal"

(end with) .

> + * For each device with which a process interacts, there must be
> + one or more mmap()'d portals.
> + * Many threads within a process can share a single portal to access
> + a single device.
> + * Multiple processes can separately mmap() the same portal, in
> + which case they still share one device hardware workqueue.
> + * The single process-wide PASID is used by all threads to interact
> + with all devices. There is not, for instance, a PASID for each
> + thread or each thread<->device pair.
> +
> +FAQ
> +===
> +
> +* What is SVA/SVM?
> +
> +Shared Virtual Addressing (SVA) permits I/O hardware and the processor to
> +work in the same address space. In short, sharing the address space. Some
> +call it Shared Virtual Memory (SVM), but Linux community wanted to avoid

waned to avoid confusing

> +it with Posix Shared Memory and Secure Virtual Machines which were terms

POSIX

> +already in circulation.
> +
> +* What is a PASID?
> +
> +A Process Address Space ID (PASID) is a PCIe-defined TLP Prefix. A PASID is

ah, BP already commented about using acronyms to define acronyms. :)

> +a 20 bit number allocated and managed by the OS. PASID is included in all

20-bit

> +transactions between the platform and the device.
> +
> +* How are shared work queues different?
> +
> +Traditionally to allow user space applications interact with hardware,
> +there is a separate instance required per process. For example, consider
> +doorbells as a mechanism of informing hardware about work to process. Each
> +doorbell is required to be spaced 4k (or page-size) apart for process
> +isolation. This requires hardware to provision that space and reserve in

reserve it in

> +MMIO. This doesn't scale as the number of threads becomes quite large. The
> +hardware also manages the queue depth for Shared Work Queues (SWQ), and
> +consumers don't need to track queue depth. If there is no space to accept
> +a command, the device will return an error indicating retry. Also
> +submitting a command to an MMIO address that can't accept ENQCMD will
> +return retry in response. In the new DMWr PCIe terminology, devices need to

so how does a submitter know whether a return of "retry" means no_space or
invalid_for_this_device?

> +support DMWr completer capability. In addition it requires all switch ports
> +to support DMWr routing and must be enabled by the PCIe subsystem, much
> +like how PCIe Atomics() are managed for instance.
> +
> +SWQ allows hardware to provision just a single address in the device. When
> +used with ENQCMD to submit work, the device can distinguish the process
> +submitting the work since it will include the PASID assigned to that
> +process. This decreases the pressure of hardware requiring to support
> +hardware to scale to a large number of processes.
> +
> +* Is this the same as a user space device driver?
> +
> +Communicating with the device via the shared work queue is much simpler
> +than a full blown user space driver. The kernel driver does all the
> +initialization of the hardware. User space only needs to worry about
> +submitting work and processing completions.
> +
> +* Is this the same as SR-IOV?
> +
> +Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV) focuses on providing independent

In 2 other places, SR-IOV is just SRIOV. Please be consistent.

> +hardware interfaces for virtualizing hardware. Hence its required to be
> +almost fully functional interface to software supporting the traditional
> +BAR's, space for interrupts via MSI-x, its own register layout.

BARs, MSI-X,

> +Virtual Functions (VFs) are assisted by the Physical Function (PF)
> +driver.
> +
> +Scalable I/O Virtualization builds on the PASID concept to create device
> +instances for virtualization. SIOV requires host software to assist in
> +creating virtual devices, each virtual device is represented by a PASID

devices; each

> +along with the BDF of the device. This allows device hardware to optimize

what is BDF? ah, bus/device/function. still, not nice here.

> +device resource creation and can grow dynamically on demand. SR-IOV creation
> +and management is very static in nature. Consult references below for more
> +details.
> +
> +* Why not just create a virtual function for each app?
> +
> +Creating PCIe SRIOV type virtual functions (VF) are expensive. They create

is

> +duplicated hardware for PCI config space requirements, Interrupts such as

requirements -- interrupts

> +MSIx for instance. Resources such as interrupts have to be hard partitioned

MSI-X

> +between VF's at creation time, and cannot scale dynamically on demand. The

VFs

> +VF's are not completely independent from the Physical function (PF). Most

VFs

> +VF's require some communication and assistance from the PF driver. SIOV

VFs

> +creates a software defined device. Where all the configuration and control
> +aspects are mediated via the slow path. The work submission and completion
> +happen without any mediation.

...

--
~Randy