From: Jacob Pan <jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Zhang Yu <zhangyu1@linux.microsoft.com>,
Jean Philippe-Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
Alexander Grest <Alexander.Grest@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Fix CMDQ timeout warning
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 15:16:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251103151631.0000703a@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aQPptXsqzt6kJS7f@Asurada-Nvidia>
Hi Nicolin,
On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 15:41:57 -0700
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 03:43:52PM -0700, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > @@ -785,10 +748,33 @@ static int arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist(struct
> > arm_smmu_device *smmu, do {
> > u64 old;
> >
> > + queue_poll_init(smmu, &qp);
> > while (!queue_has_space(&llq, n + sync)) {
> > + unsigned long iflags;
> > +
> > local_irq_restore(flags);
> > - if
> > (arm_smmu_cmdq_poll_until_not_full(smmu, cmdq, &llq))
> > - dev_err_ratelimited(smmu->dev,
> > "CMDQ timeout\n");
> > + /*
> > + * Try to update our copy of cons by
> > grabbing exclusive cmdq access. If
> > + * that fails, spin until somebody else
> > updates it for us.
> > + */
> > + if
> > (arm_smmu_cmdq_exclusive_trylock_irqsave(cmdq, iflags)) {
> > + WRITE_ONCE(cmdq->q.llq.cons,
> > readl_relaxed(cmdq->q.cons_reg));
> > +
> > arm_smmu_cmdq_exclusive_unlock_irqrestore(cmdq, iflags);
> > + llq.val =
> > READ_ONCE(cmdq->q.llq.val);
> > + local_irq_save(flags);
>
> I don't quite get the reason why it moves queue_poll_init() and
> add local_irq_save(). It's quite different than what the driver
> has, so it's nicer to explain in the commit message at least.
Let me add the following to the commit message.
The original code has three nested while loops,
do {
while (!queue_has_space(&llq, n + sync)) {
// inside arm_smmu_cmdq_poll_until_not_full
queue_poll_init(smmu, &qp);
do {
if(!queue_full(llq))
break;
ret = queue_poll(&qp);
}while (!ret);
}
check exit condition
} while (1);
Now, with this patch we reduced to two nested while loops and
calling queue_has_space() only without checking queue_full.
do {
queue_poll_init(smmu, &qp);
while (!queue_has_space(&llq, n + sync)) {
ret = queue_poll(&qp);
if (ret == -ETIMEDOUT) {
dev_err();
queue_poll_init(smmu, &qp);
}
}
check exit condition
} while (1);
An additional queue_poll_init is added outside inner while loop to arm
the timer. We can merge the two queue_poll_init with a local bool
variable to track whether init is needed, but IMHO it is not any better.
Adding local_irq_save() just to make sure it pairs up with
local_irq_restore(), no functional changes.
> I still feel that we could just replace the _until_not_full()
> with a _until_has_space()?
Since the current code uses three nested while loops, replacing the
inner _until_not_full() function means means retaining all three nested
while loops and calling queue_has_space in two places - once in the
middle while loop then again in this _until_has_space() function.
I tried to extract the inner loop into a function but it requires
passing in irqflags to restore. Not pretty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-03 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-20 22:43 [PATCH v2 0/2] SMMU v3 CMDQ fix and improvement Jacob Pan
2025-10-20 22:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Fix CMDQ timeout warning Jacob Pan
2025-10-30 22:41 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-11-03 23:16 ` Jacob Pan [this message]
2025-11-04 1:23 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-11-04 18:25 ` Jacob Pan
2025-11-04 18:48 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-11-04 19:37 ` Jacob Pan
2025-10-20 22:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve CMDQ lock fairness and efficiency Jacob Pan
2025-10-31 2:00 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-11-04 1:08 ` Jacob Pan
2025-10-30 15:42 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] SMMU v3 CMDQ fix and improvement Jacob Pan
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=20251103151631.0000703a@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=Alexander.Grest@microsoft.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangyu1@linux.microsoft.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