Re: [PATCH RFC 05/11] arm-smmu-v3/sva: Add SVA domain support

[Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 02:40:24PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> Add support for SVA domain allocation and provide an SVA-specific
> iommu_domain_ops.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h   | 14 ++++++
>  .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c   | 45 +++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c   | 13 +++++-
>  3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h
> index cd48590ada30..7631c00fdcbd 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h
> @@ -759,6 +759,10 @@ struct iommu_sva *arm_smmu_sva_bind(struct device *dev, struct mm_struct *mm,
>  void arm_smmu_sva_unbind(struct iommu_sva *handle);
>  u32 arm_smmu_sva_get_pasid(struct iommu_sva *handle);
>  void arm_smmu_sva_notifier_synchronize(void);
> +int arm_smmu_sva_attach_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +				  struct device *dev, ioasid_t id);
> +void arm_smmu_sva_detach_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +				   struct device *dev, ioasid_t id);
>  #else /* CONFIG_ARM_SMMU_V3_SVA */
>  static inline bool arm_smmu_sva_supported(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>  {
> @@ -804,5 +808,15 @@ static inline u32 arm_smmu_sva_get_pasid(struct iommu_sva *handle)
>  }
>  
>  static inline void arm_smmu_sva_notifier_synchronize(void) {}
> +
> +static inline int arm_smmu_sva_attach_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +						struct device *dev, ioasid_t id)
> +{
> +	return -ENODEV;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void arm_smmu_sva_detach_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +						 struct device *dev,
> +						 ioasid_t id) {}
>  #endif /* CONFIG_ARM_SMMU_V3_SVA */
>  #endif /* _ARM_SMMU_V3_H */
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c
> index 22ddd05bbdcd..1e114b9dc17f 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c
> @@ -534,3 +534,48 @@ void arm_smmu_sva_notifier_synchronize(void)
>  	 */
>  	mmu_notifier_synchronize();
>  }
> +
> +int arm_smmu_sva_attach_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +				  struct device *dev, ioasid_t id)
> +{
> +	int ret = 0;
> +	struct iommu_sva *handle;
> +	struct mm_struct *mm = domain->sva_cookie;
> +	struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain);
> +
> +	if (smmu_domain->stage != ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_S1 ||

This check is for the parent domain, iommu_get_domain_for_dev(dev)

> +	    domain->type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_SVA || !mm)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&sva_lock);
> +	handle = __arm_smmu_sva_bind(dev, mm);
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(handle))
> +		ret = PTR_ERR(handle);
> +	mutex_unlock(&sva_lock);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +void arm_smmu_sva_detach_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +				   struct device *dev, ioasid_t id)
> +{
> +	struct arm_smmu_bond *bond = NULL, *t;
> +	struct mm_struct *mm = domain->sva_cookie;
> +	struct arm_smmu_master *master = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&sva_lock);
> +	list_for_each_entry(t, &master->bonds, list) {
> +		if (t->mm == mm) {
> +			bond = t;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!WARN_ON(!bond) && refcount_dec_and_test(&bond->refs)) {
> +		list_del(&bond->list);
> +		arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_put(bond->smmu_mn);
> +		iommu_sva_free_pasid(bond->mm);

Can be dropped since iommu.c does PASID allocation (also the one in
__arm_smmu_sva_bind() as a cleanup patch)

> +		kfree(bond);
> +	}
> +	mutex_unlock(&sva_lock);
> +}
> 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 8e262210b5ad..2e9d3cd30510 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> @@ -88,6 +88,8 @@ static struct arm_smmu_option_prop arm_smmu_options[] = {
>  	{ 0, NULL},
>  };
>  
> +static void arm_smmu_domain_free(struct iommu_domain *domain);
> +
>  static void parse_driver_options(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>  {
>  	int i = 0;
> @@ -1995,6 +1997,12 @@ static bool arm_smmu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +static const struct iommu_domain_ops arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops = {
> +	.attach_dev_pasid	= arm_smmu_sva_attach_dev_pasid,
> +	.detach_dev_pasid	= arm_smmu_sva_detach_dev_pasid,
> +	.free			= arm_smmu_domain_free,
> +};
> +
>  static struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_domain_alloc(unsigned type)
>  {
>  	struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain;
> @@ -2002,7 +2010,8 @@ static struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_domain_alloc(unsigned type)
>  	if (type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_UNMANAGED &&
>  	    type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA &&
>  	    type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA_FQ &&
> -	    type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY)
> +	    type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY &&
> +	    type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_SVA)
>  		return NULL;

We don't need to allocate an arm_smmu_domain, it likely won't have
anything in common with the SVA domain and it would be much clearer within
the SMMU driver if we use different structs for parent and child domains.
For now we could just return a naked struct iommu_domain. Sanity checks in
arm_smmu_attach_dev() would be good too, a SVA domain can't be attached as
a parent domain.

I this this works otherwise, but will need to test the series to see what
more is needed, when I find some time.

Thanks,
Jean

>  
>  	/*
> @@ -2018,6 +2027,8 @@ static struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_domain_alloc(unsigned type)
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&smmu_domain->devices);
>  	spin_lock_init(&smmu_domain->devices_lock);
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&smmu_domain->mmu_notifiers);
> +	if (type == IOMMU_DOMAIN_SVA)
> +		smmu_domain->domain.ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops;
>  
>  	return &smmu_domain->domain;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>