From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] iommu: Remove IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_SVA/_IOPF
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 10:57:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <59998dcc-9452-4efd-be69-d95754217633@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABQgh9EG3gjtw19qvr7OhxKmR8E6+xwBf9b3=WPNrXRc-m9DjQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/15/25 19:35, Zhangfei Gao wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 at 18:09, Baolu Lu<baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On 2/15/25 16:11, Zhangfei Gao wrote:
>>> It does not relate to multi devices, one device also happens when user
>>> page fault triggers.
>>>
>>> iopf_queue_remove_device is called.
>>> rcu_assign_pointer(param->fault_param, NULL);
>>>
>>> call trace
>>> [ 304.961312] Call trace:
>>> [ 304.961314] show_stack+0x20/0x38 (C)
>>> [ 304.961319] dump_stack_lvl+0xc0/0xd0
>>> [ 304.961324] dump_stack+0x18/0x28
>>> [ 304.961327] iopf_queue_remove_device+0xb0/0x1f0
>>> [ 304.961331] arm_smmu_remove_master_domain+0x204/0x250
>>> [ 304.961336] arm_smmu_attach_commit+0x64/0x100
>>> [ 304.961338] arm_smmu_attach_dev_nested+0x104/0x1a8
>>> [ 304.961340] __iommu_attach_device+0x2c/0x110
>>> [ 304.961343] __iommu_device_set_domain.isra.0+0x78/0xe0
>>> [ 304.961345] __iommu_group_set_domain_internal+0x78/0x160
>>> [ 304.961347] iommu_replace_group_handle+0x9c/0x150
>>> [ 304.961350] iommufd_fault_domain_replace_dev+0x88/0x120
>>> [ 304.961353] iommufd_device_do_replace+0x190/0x3c0
>>> [ 304.961355] iommufd_device_change_pt+0x270/0x688
>>> [ 304.961357] iommufd_device_replace+0x20/0x38
>>> [ 304.961359] vfio_iommufd_physical_attach_ioas+0x30/0x78
>>> [ 304.961363] vfio_df_ioctl_attach_pt+0xa8/0x188
>>> [ 304.961366] vfio_device_fops_unl_ioctl+0x310/0x990
>>>
>>>
>>> When page fault triggers:
>>>
>>> [ 1016.383578] ------------[ cut here ]-----------
>>> [ 1016.388184] WARNING: CPU: 35 PID: 717 at
>>> drivers/iommu/io-pgfault.c:231 iommu_report_device_fault+0x2c8/0x470
>> It's likely that iopf_queue_add_device() was not called for this device.
> iopf_queue_add_device is called, but quickly iopf_queue_remove_device
> is called during guest bootup.
> Then fault_param is set to NULL.
>
> arm_smmu_attach_commit
> arm_smmu_remove_master_domain
> // newly added in the first patch
> if (master_domain) {
> if (master_domain->using_iopf)
It seems the above check is incorrect. We only need to disable iopf when
an iopf-capable domain is about to be removed. Will the following
additional change make any difference?
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
index 28e67a9e3861..9b9ef738d070 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
@@ -2822,7 +2822,7 @@ static void arm_smmu_remove_master_domain(struct
arm_smmu_master *master,
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
if (master_domain) {
- if (master_domain->using_iopf)
+ if (domain->iopf_handler)
arm_smmu_disable_iopf(master);
kfree(master_domain);
}
> arm_smmu_disable_iopf(master); ->
> iopf_queue_remove_device
> kfree(master_domain);
> }
>
> As a comparison, without this patchset, only iopf_queue_add_device is
> called, not call iopf_queue_remove_device
Thanks,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-18 3:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-14 6:10 [PATCH 00/12] iommu: Remove IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_SVA/_IOPF Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 01/12] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Put iopf enablement in the domain attach path Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 02/12] iommu/vt-d: Check if SVA is supported when attaching the SVA domain Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 03/12] iommu: Remove IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_SVA Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 04/12] iommu/vt-d: Move scalable mode ATS enablement to probe path Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 05/12] iommu/vt-d: Move PRI enablement in " Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 06/12] iommu/vt-d: Cleanup intel_context_flush_present() Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:10 ` [PATCH 07/12] iommu/vt-d: Put iopf enablement in domain attach path Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 6:11 ` [PATCH 08/12] iommufd/selftest: " Lu Baolu
2025-02-20 1:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-20 7:03 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-20 18:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-21 1:31 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-21 15:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-22 7:25 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-24 19:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-14 6:11 ` [PATCH 09/12] dmaengine: idxd: Remove unnecessary IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_IOPF Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 11:22 ` Vinod Koul
2025-02-14 16:25 ` Dave Jiang
2025-02-18 22:55 ` Fenghua Yu
2025-02-19 6:02 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-20 1:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-14 6:11 ` [PATCH 10/12] uacce: " Lu Baolu
2025-02-20 1:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-14 6:11 ` [PATCH 11/12] iommufd: " Lu Baolu
2025-02-14 7:06 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-15 6:32 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-18 13:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-19 5:59 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-20 1:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-14 6:11 ` [PATCH 12/12] iommu: Remove iommu_dev_enable/disable_feature() Lu Baolu
2025-02-20 1:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-14 8:43 ` [PATCH 00/12] iommu: Remove IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_SVA/_IOPF Zhangfei Gao
2025-02-14 9:24 ` Zhangfei Gao
2025-02-14 12:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-15 8:11 ` Zhangfei Gao
2025-02-15 10:06 ` Baolu Lu
2025-02-15 11:35 ` Zhangfei Gao
2025-02-18 2:57 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2025-02-18 6:13 ` Zhangfei Gao
2025-02-18 13:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-18 15:25 ` Zhangfei Gao
2025-02-18 16:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-19 6:06 ` Baolu Lu
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=59998dcc-9452-4efd-be69-d95754217633@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangfei.gao@linaro.org \
/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