Re: [PATCH v1 14/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add arm_smmu_cache_invalidate_user

Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-20T16:15:54Z

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 08:56:00AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:03:04AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 03:56:50AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> >
> > > I recall that one difficulty is to pass the vSID from the guest
> > > down to the host kernel driver and to link with the pSID. What I
> > > did previously for VCMDQ was to set the SID_MATCH register with
> > > iommu_group_id(group) and set the SID_REPLACE register with the
> > > pSID. Then hyper will use the iommu_group_id to search for the
> > > pair of the registers, and to set vSID. Perhaps we should think
> > > of something smarter.
> >
> > We need an ioctl for this, I think. To load a map of vSID to dev_id
> > into the driver. Kernel will convert dev_id to pSID. Driver will
> > program the map into HW.
>
> Can we just pass a vSID via the alloc ioctl like this?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> @@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ struct iommu_hwpt_arm_smmuv3 {
> #define IOMMU_SMMUV3_FLAG_VMID (1 << 1) /* vmid override */
> __u64 flags;
> __u32 s2vmid;
> - __u32 __reserved;
> + __u32 sid;
> __u64 s1ctxptr;
> __u64 s1cdmax;
> __u64 s1fmt;
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> An alloc is initiated by an SMMU_CMD_CFGI_STE command that has
> an SID filed anyway.

No, a HWPT is not a device or a SID. a HWPT is an ASID in the ARM
model.

dev_id is the SID.

The cfgi_ste will carry the vSID which is mapped to a iommufd dev_id.

The kernel has to translate the vSID to the dev_id to the pSID to
issue an ATC invalidation for the correct entity.

> > SW path will program the map into an xarray
>
> I found a tricky thing about SIDs in the SMMU driver when doing
> this experiment: the SMMU kernel driver mostly handles devices
> using struct arm_smmu_master. However, an arm_smmu_master might
> have a num_streams>1, meaning a device can have multiple SIDs.
> Though it seems that PCI devices might not be in this scope, a
> plain xarray might not work for other type of devices in a long
> run, if there'd be?

You'd replicate each of the vSIDs of the extra SIDs in the xarray.

> > > cache_invalidate_user as void, like we are doing now? An fault
> > > injection pathway to report CERROR asynchronously is what we've
> > > been doing though -- even with Eric's previous VFIO solution.
> >
> > Where is this? How does it look?
>
> That's postponed with the PRI support, right? My use case does
> not need PRI actually, but a fault injection pathway to guests.
> This pathway should be able to take care of any CERROR (detected
> by a host interrupt) or something funky in cache_invalidate_user
> requests itself?

I would expect that if invalidation can fail that we have a way to
signal that failure back to the guest.

Jason