From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Cc: nicolinc@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, will@kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org,
kevin.tian@intel.com, jsnitsel@redhat.com, vasant.hegde@amd.com,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, santosh.shukla@amd.com,
sairaj.arunkodilkar@amd.com, jon.grimm@amd.com,
prashanthpra@google.com, wvw@google.com, wnliu@google.com,
gptran@google.com, kpsingh@google.com, joao.m.martins@oracle.com,
alejandro.j.jimenez@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] iommu/amd: Add support for nested domain attach/detach
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2025 11:59:00 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251006145900.GT3360665@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251001060954.5030-12-suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 06:09:53AM +0000, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> +static void set_dte_nested(struct amd_iommu *iommu,
> + struct dev_table_entry *gdte,
> + struct nested_domain *ndom,
> + struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data)
> +{
> + struct dev_table_entry *initial_dte;
> + struct dev_table_entry new = {0};
> + struct protection_domain *pdom = dev_data->parent;
No, this is ndom->parent.
The parent is NOT required to be attached to the device already.
> + if (WARN_ON(!ndom || !pdom || (pdom->iop.mode == PAGE_MODE_NONE)))
> + return;
> +
> + amd_iommu_make_clear_dte(dev_data, &new);
> +
> + new.data[0] |= iommu_virt_to_phys(pdom->iop.root);
> + new.data[0] |= FIELD_PREP(DTE_MODE_MASK, pdom->iop.mode);
> + new.data[0] |= DTE_FLAG_IR | DTE_FLAG_IW | DTE_FLAG_TV;
> + new.data[0] |= (DTE_FLAG_PPR & gdte->data[0]);
> + if (pdom->dirty_tracking)
> + new.data[0] |= DTE_FLAG_HAD;
> +
> + if (dev_data->ats_enabled)
> + new.data[1] |= DTE_FLAG_IOTLB;
This sequence should be in some set_dte_gcr3() ??
> + /*
> + * Restore cached persistent DTE bits, which can be set by information
> + * in IVRS table. See set_dev_entry_from_acpi().
> + */
> + initial_dte = amd_iommu_get_ivhd_dte_flags(iommu->pci_seg->id, dev_data->devid);
> + if (initial_dte) {
> + new.data128[0] |= initial_dte->data128[0];
> + new.data128[1] |= initial_dte->data128[1];
> + }
This should go into amd_iommu_make_clear_dte() I think, and refactor
it out of iommu_update_dte256() ?
Every created DTE needs these bits set, right?
> +
> + /* Guest translation stuff */
> + new.data[0] |= (gdte->data[0] &
> + (DTE_GLX | DTE_FLAG_GV | DTE_FLAG_GIOV));
> +
> + /* GCR3 table */
> + new.data[0] |= (gdte->data[0] & DTE_GCR3_14_12);
> + new.data[1] |= (gdte->data[1] & (DTE_GCR3_30_15 | DTE_GCR3_51_31));
> +
> + /* Guest paging mode */
> + new.data[2] |= (gdte->data[2] & DTE_GPT_LEVEL_MASK);
I didn't see anything validating gdte has only permitted set bits in
the prior patch?
If this is goint to decode array item by item then why not use struct
iommu_hwpt_amd_guest in the nested_domain ?
> +static int nested_attach_device(struct iommu_domain *dom, struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct iommu_dev_data *dev_data = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> + struct amd_iommu *iommu = get_amd_iommu_from_dev_data(dev_data);
> + struct nested_domain *ndom = to_ndomain(dom);
> + struct dev_table_entry *gdte = &ndom->guest_dte;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + if (dev_data->ndom == ndom)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (!dev_is_pci(dev))
> + return -EINVAL;
Why?
> + /* Currently only support GCR3TRPMode with nested translation */
> + if (!check_feature2(FEATURE_GCR3TRPMODE))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
This is impossible since we can't allocate a nest parent. If you want
to make a redundent check then call is_nest_parent_supported()
> + /* We need to check host capability before setting the mode */
> + if ((FIELD_GET(DTE_GPT_LEVEL_MASK, gdte->data[2]) == GUEST_PGTABLE_5_LEVEL) &&
> + (amd_iommu_gpt_level < PAGE_MODE_5_LEVEL))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
I wonder if this should be done during alloc
> + WARN_ON(dev_data->ndom);
> +
> + dev_data->ndom = ndom;
Useless?
> + mutex_lock(&dev_data->mutex);
> +
> + /* Update device table entry */
> + set_dte_nested(iommu, gdte, ndom, dev_data);
> + amd_iommu_device_flush_dte(dev_data);
> + amd_iommu_completion_wait(iommu);
Hurray
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-06 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-01 6:09 [PATCH v2 00/12] iommu/amd: Introduce Nested Translation support Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] iommu/amd: Rename DEV_DOMID_MASK to DTE_DOMID_MASK Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:12 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 14:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] iommu/amd: Make amd_iommu_pdom_id_alloc() non-static Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:12 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] iommu/amd: Make amd_iommu_pdom_id_free() non-static Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:13 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 14:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] iommu/amd: Make amd_iommu_device_flush_dte() non-static Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:14 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 14:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] iommu/amd: Make amd_iommu_update_dte256() non-static Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:15 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] iommu/amd: Make amd_iommu_make_clear_dte() non-static inline Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:17 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] iommu/amd: Make amd_iommu_completion_wait() non-static Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:24 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] iommufd: Introduce data struct for AMD nested domain allocation Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 17:31 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] iommu/amd: Add support for nest parent " Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 18:00 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 14:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-08 14:16 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] iommu/amd: Add support for nested " Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 18:29 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 14:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-07 20:36 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2025-10-07 23:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-09 6:22 ` Sairaj Kodilkar
2025-10-09 9:16 ` Sairaj Kodilkar
2025-10-09 14:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] iommu/amd: Add support for nested domain attach/detach Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 19:04 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 14:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-10-07 19:22 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2025-10-07 23:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-09 7:18 ` Sairaj Kodilkar
2025-10-09 14:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 6:09 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] iommu/amd: Introduce IOMMUFD vIOMMU support for AMD Suravee Suthikulpanit
2025-10-02 20:05 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-06 15:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=20251006145900.GT3360665@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=alejandro.j.jimenez@oracle.com \
--cc=gptran@google.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
--cc=jon.grimm@amd.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jsnitsel@redhat.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kpsingh@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=prashanthpra@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=sairaj.arunkodilkar@amd.com \
--cc=santosh.shukla@amd.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=vasant.hegde@amd.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=wnliu@google.com \
--cc=wvw@google.com \
/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