Re: [PATCH 0/3] Apple M1 DART IOMMU driver

Sven Peter
2021-03-22T22:18:47Z

Hi Mark,

On Sun, Mar 21, 2021, at 19:35, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> Guess we do need to understand a little bit better how the USB DART
> actually works. My hypothesis (based on our discussion on #asahi) is
> that the XHCI host controller and the peripheral controller of the
> DWC3 block use different DMA "streams" that are handled by the
> different sub-DARTs.

I've done some more experiments and the situation is unfortunately more
complicated: Most DMA transfers are translated with the first DART.
But sometimes (and I have not been able to figure out the exact conditions)
transfers instead have to go through the second DART.
This happens e.g. with one of my USB keyboards after a stop EP command
is issued: Suddenly the xhci_ep_ctx struct must be translated through the
second DART.

What this likely means is that we'll need to point both DARTs
to the same pagetables and just issue the TLB maintenance operations
as a group.

>
> The Corellium folks use a DART + sub-DART model in their driver and a
> single node in the device tree that represents both. That might sense
> since the error registers and interrupts are shared. Maybe it would
> make sense to select the appropriate sub-DART based on the DMA stream
> ID?

dwc3 specifically seems to require stream id #1 from the DART
at <0x5 0x02f00000> and stream id #0 from the DART at <0x5 0x02f80000>.
Both of these only share a IRQ line but are otherwise completely independent.
Each has their own error registers, etc. and we need some way to
specify these two DARTs + the appropriate stream ID.

Essentially we have three options to represent this now:

1) Add both DARTs as separate regs, use #iommu-cells = <2> and have the
first cell select the DART and the second one the stream ID.
We could allow #iommu-cells = <1> in case only one reg is specified
for the PCIe DART:

usb_dart1@502f00000 {
compatible = "apple,t8103-dart";
reg = <0x5 0x02f00000 0x0 0x4000>, <0x5 0x02f80000 0x0 0x4000>;
#iommu-cells = <2>;
...
};

usb1 {
iommus = <&usb_dart1 0 1>, <&usb_dart1 1 0>;
...
};

I prefer this option because we fully describe the DART in a single
device node here. It also feels natural to group them like this because
they need to share some properties (like dma-window and the interrupt)
anyway.

2) Create two DART nodes which share the same IRQ line and attach them
both to the master node:

usb_dart1a@502f00000 {
compatible = "apple,t8103-dart";
reg = <0x5 0x02f00000 0x0 0x4000>;
#iommu-cells = <1>;
...
};
usb_dart1b@502f80000 {
compatible = "apple,t8103-dart";
reg = <0x5 0x02f80000 0x0 0x4000>;
#iommu-cells = <1>;
...
};

usb1 {
iommus = <&usb_dart1a 1>, <&usb_dart1b 0>;
...
};

I dislike this one because attaching those two DARTs to a single device
seems rather unusual. We'd also have to duplicate the dma-window setting,
make sure it's the same for both DARTs and there are probably even more
complications I can't think of right now. It seems like this would also
make the device tree very verbose and the implementation itself more
complicated.

3) Introduce another property and let the DART driver take care of
mirroring the pagetables. I believe this would be similar to
the sid-remap property:

usb_dart1@502f00000 {
compatible = "apple,t8103-dart";
reg = <0x5 0x02f00000 0x0 0x4000>, <0x5 0x02f80000 0x0 0x4000>;
#iommu-cells = <1>;
sid-remap = <0 1>;
};
usb1 {
iommus = <&usb_dart1 0>;
};

I slightly dislike this one because we now specify which stream id
to use in two places: Once in the device node and another time in the
new property in the DART node. I also don't think the binding is much
simpler than the first one.

> > where #dma-address-cells and #dma-size-cells default to
> > #address-cells and #size-cells respectively if I understand
> > the code correctly. That way we could also just always use
> > a 64bit address and size in the DT, e.g.
> >
> > pcie_dart {
> > [ ... ]
> > dma-window = <0 0x100000 0 0x3fe00000>;
> > [ ... ]
> > };
>
> That sounds like a serious contender to me! Hopefully one of the
> Linux kernel developers can give this some sort of blessing.
>
> I think it would make sense for us to just rely on the #address-cells
> and #size-cells defaults for the M1 device tree.
>

Agreed.

Best,

Sven