Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] iommufd: Add devices_users to track the hw_pagetable usage by device

Nicolin Chen
2023-02-01T17:46:51Z

On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 11:53:02AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 10:57:13PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 04:35:35PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > > IMHO I would structure the smmu driver so that all the different
> > > iommu_domain formats have their own ops pointer. The special
> > > "undecided" format would have a special ops with only attach_dev and
> > > at first attach it would switch the ops to whatever format it
> > > selected.
> > >
> > > I think this could get rid of a lot of the 'if undecided/S1/S2/CD'
> > > complexity all over the place. You know what type it is because you
> > > were called on a op that is only called on its type.
> >
> > An auto/unmanaged domain allocation via iommu_domain_alloc() would
> > be S1, while an allocation via ops->domain_alloc_user can be S1 or
> > S2 with a given parameter/flag. So, actually the format is always
> > decided.
>
> No, it can't decide the S1/S2 format until it knows the smmu because
> of this:
>
> /* Restrict the stage to what we can actually support */
> if (!(smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_TRANS_S1))
> smmu_domain->stage = ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_S2;
> if (!(smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_TRANS_S2))
> smmu_domain->stage = ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_S1;
>
> So the format is never decided.

OK. That's right. And the solution to that is also passing a dev
pointer in regular ->domain_alloc() op.

> > that we don't pass the dev pointer down to ops->domain_alloc. So,
> > the SMMU driver can't know which SMMU device the device is behind,
> > resulting in being unable to finalizing the domain. Robin mentioned
> > that he has a patch "iommu: Pass device through ops->domain_alloc".
> > Perhaps that is required for us to entirely fix the add_domain()
> > problem?
>
> Robin is making progress, hopefully soon
>
> So the issue is with replace you need to have the domain populated
> before we can call replace but you can't populate the domain until it
> is bound because of the above issue? That seems unsovlable without
> fixing up the driver.

Not really. A REPLACE ioctl is just an ATTACH, if the device just
gets BIND-ed. So the SMMU driver will initialize ("finalise") the
domain during the replace() call, then iopt_table_add_domain() can
be done.

So, not a blocker here.

> I'd say replace can go ahead ingoring that issue and that for now
> replace will only work on ARM with domains created by
> domain_alloc_user that are fully configured.
>
> It will start working correctly for auto domains once Robin's changes
> get finished.
>
> Is there another issue?

Oh. I think we mixed the topics here. These three patches were
not to unblock but to clean up a way for the replace series and
the nesting series, for the device locking issue:

if (cur_hwpt != hwpt)
mutex_lock(&cur_hwpt->device_lock);
mutex_lock(&hwpt->device_lock);
...
if (iommufd_hw_pagetabe_has_group()) { // touching device list
...
iommu_group_replace_domain();
...
}
if (cur_hwpt && hwpt)
list_del(&idev->devices_item);
list_add(&idev->devices_item, &cur_hwpt->devices);
...
mutex_unlock(&hwpt->device_lock);
if (cur_hwpt != hwpt)
mutex_unlock(&cur_hwpt->device_lock);

I just gave another thought about it. Since we have the patch-2
from this series moving the ioas->mutex, it already serializes
attach/detach routines. And I see that all the places touching
idev->device_item and hwpt->devices are protected by ioas->mutex.
So, perhaps we can simply remove the device_lock?

do_attach():
mutex_lock(&ioas->mutex); // protect both devices_item and hwpt_item
...
if (iommufd_hw_pagetabe_has_group()) { // touching device list
...
iommu_group_replace_domain();
...
}
if (cur_hwpt && hwpt)
list_del(&idev->devices_item);
list_add(&idev->devices_item, &cur_hwpt->devices);
...
mutex_unlock(&ioas->mutex);

do_detach():
mutex_lock(&ioas->mutex); // protect both devices_item and hwpt_item
...
if (iommufd_hw_pagetabe_has_group()) { // touching device list
...
iommu_detach_group();
...
}
list_del(&idev->devices_item);
...
mutex_unlock(&ioas->mutex);

If this is correct, I think I can prepare the replace series and
send it by the end of the day.

Thanks
Nic