From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ed1-f52.google.com (mail-ed1-f52.google.com [209.85.208.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6C6F2F0C48 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 16:01:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783699279; cv=none; b=VBnrMVxfSwHQYNhtjAY6p+zsdpN7qeyaT3i1T9/KNbuEZH3e+eB3uHYlX/4OogwCCF5+Y3Fpt4MwjlMYk1CJ6lmODuJ947Zzv1Q1imS46EWj/LQJfB3TAevimsaMceVZTyagREmh6sRsyUw27FYy4sn8D4iOiWeNeJ/4vEyXwgQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783699279; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LHFgDgTvBl/DfAaQ85qu2sTbr3g+uQhv77+URO8Mtbg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Hv3h/2SsUcoBk8D+eEsH+4TTQXtAa6Bo7AOr4H869i42MLmqyLcDQprqToiL+TUU6VO+69S0VaKXC5/iUAlsuOo2PYgWGwoTVaFaNK73kDhCFWzgoPgUnRiB/Mp33t33ygW1de3bNL2h9csu54jDmAPGAPwAQ4OS3tqLHKg06is= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=s8vqN3Ew; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.52 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="s8vqN3Ew" Received: by mail-ed1-f52.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-698bf053053so1721690a12.3 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:01:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1783699273; x=1784304073; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=C1SvbCR97Zwgn4Jhcjeyc5rNgHzndad6U6YnbYiEVE4=; b=s8vqN3EwTBsxr8VLhU1AZjPw27jQMU6zPN16Q/JQ8MlUDHvp8xUKeDoz00lrihkWu9 StFFm5k2cv3UHGXpC6pLVKs8gpqtDYSKN2ia/49Nq1A+vP7yspO0zGTCA+GE+ZgkiKJS 5KH6qEGYmFu91QSx2Z2N/oGM94uEBYDCVStrDA6ZG4Mmz8DmHkMrrPwcNS/pC9W1iTaf dEim9Z+p8aLdiYvkOnAM6epJfxAqQZgtXrsX1WtTtlYYsuWsYKgZ2dur+7hDvEO5pcRJ jnpJJWOkthKKIhZN8sMMkJi127/TMol3uq/BNWkVQE3Krul+gspj2x4rOBeoc1ak0KMF nsNA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1783699273; x=1784304073; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=C1SvbCR97Zwgn4Jhcjeyc5rNgHzndad6U6YnbYiEVE4=; b=jykTtn7DnvU1cTm6CYUkxCFGZCYUcTmgOeJNdC1BOo8kJdvX6VVvzl1NQ466fXt06p tLqk69h3fo7FBbTRSuXmaftCjeAMz+yRuq9ShcbvNg1PwPq9c20EdMYys8rOyyzd8KPo wKC/Xt0mP+9Su2RoE9S9hQZNhItsqrlXWKVFrA9BOXtocFdzsXLnqcYc1qRhfPzF4yO3 fYgeN2vDqidXxnk5BT1mjzZWX61ISdKtAWud/2iGtMo0/KRy/jE0fsKR9cso/mpN4V6W Z5GU8FsamtjXtY2FZjQ+7ow+cTK6esBxkAx4ppEIRibQxjETtVqcYf73ucOJDLWgvAQg 74gQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RrvikITaMZ8Ca8igDmy/zGHG7DUtvHhmLepGsY7zVxBrGX/y7z0BffQJNkQzW7u3n4UNqa0oCdg3qXSzuk=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwQdq2DtPr9tf7cvbXFPluBHoFg3KOuADvY1AEUrSr05/ivHZlk Ju2V8F433SztjPD4D5DN7Ii/T/XEtg6Gcl0/V2UhGf5LY1772NS4nMk8qDx1Qc1aoQ== X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cmgjXK96BBpdY2D2ftn/b34ww9VfrobIQqTzMiqyHLYPc+cGOh1JGcyPpI4lJb 6NKAQPEwdGFQSESzY2wqDNiZmJbfTUeRdKrpyR9OpCxAxEvp/DO33o7BSnxSTjZezCTIHy8MOVT SsQC7Yrp9bzfkc3JIHlYmKvZNYTvrHCi8Eav4lZpQhCraO+JfODAz1FzWe0l0oMTn/ikkKOJI3x Vj9XC91mJ485uD8L0RN1/HJpNPdn+s/fBbQeqgUnKNwpFGPwxyjydjxNX4V7zy6Kj0aNj2Qsg9T w+1vTMUH3M/DNF+ByPWNTtMg4kyeVEbMhiKKmtkz58/6XSRjEB8ADpG4/7oQ0q0a0Akbe53ybNS 6d04y33/3X3HgIkT2nvB+ysEJgTjygMuBRv23kSb0G/ZuebXRw1JcI2fuo5Tj13zEkHKGLDq3Qv il06EDPeK+mh+y1Xf9kaIhO48V60GTmHq2xd363Tvaor0Kv7KSRAo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:4288:b0:698:9be1:4a48 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-69ab44aafe2mr5035845a12.33.1783699272374; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (137.69.77.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.77.69.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-69a19cd87d6sm11239809a12.6.2026.07.10.09.01.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 17:01:07 +0100 From: Vincent Donnefort To: Mostafa Saleh Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, iommu@lists.linux.dev, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, joey.gouly@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, joro@8bytes.org, jean-philippe@linaro.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, mark.rutland@arm.com, qperret@google.com, tabba@google.com, sebastianene@google.com, keirf@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 16/25] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-kvm: Add CMDQ functions Message-ID: References: <20260501111928.259252-1-smostafa@google.com> <20260501111928.259252-17-smostafa@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260501111928.259252-17-smostafa@google.com> On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 11:19:18AM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > Add functions to access the command queue, there are 2 main usage: > - Hypervisor's own commands, as TLB invalidation, would use functions > as smmu_send_cmd(), which creates and sends a command. > - Add host commands to the shadow command queue, after being filtered, > these will be added with smmu_add_cmd_raw. > > Signed-off-by: Mostafa Saleh > --- > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 14 ++- > .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/pkvm/arm-smmu-v3.c | 107 ++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > 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 f904f4d19609..3fc499608d76 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h > @@ -1156,19 +1156,21 @@ u32 smmu_idr5_to_oas(u32 reg); > unsigned long smmu_idr5_to_pgsize(u32 reg); > > /* Queue functions shared between kernel and hyp. */ > -static inline bool queue_has_space(struct arm_smmu_ll_queue *q, u32 n) > +static inline u32 queue_space(struct arm_smmu_ll_queue *q) > { > - u32 space, prod, cons; > + u32 prod, cons; > > prod = Q_IDX(q, q->prod); > cons = Q_IDX(q, q->cons); > > if (Q_WRP(q, q->prod) == Q_WRP(q, q->cons)) > - space = (1 << q->max_n_shift) - (prod - cons); > - else > - space = cons - prod; > + return (1 << q->max_n_shift) - (prod - cons); > + return cons - prod; > +} > > - return space >= n; > +static inline bool queue_has_space(struct arm_smmu_ll_queue *q, u32 n) > +{ > + return queue_space(q) >= n; > } > > static inline bool queue_full(struct arm_smmu_ll_queue *q) > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/pkvm/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/pkvm/arm-smmu-v3.c > index 3b77796dafc7..aac455599728 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/pkvm/arm-smmu-v3.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/pkvm/arm-smmu-v3.c > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ > */ > #include > > +#include > #include > #include > #include > @@ -22,6 +23,31 @@ struct hyp_arm_smmu_v3_device *kvm_hyp_arm_smmu_v3_smmus; > > #define cmdq_size(cmdq) ((1 << ((cmdq)->llq.max_n_shift)) * CMDQ_ENT_DWORDS * 8) I only looked at that smmu_wait() as this is the hyp_clock_ns() caller. > > +/* > + * Wait until @cond is true. > + * Return 0 on success, or -ETIMEDOUT nit: Would be nice to explain use_wfe. > + */ > +#define smmu_wait(use_wfe, _cond) \ nit:, (__use_wfe, __cond), or (use_fw, cond) > +({ \ > + int __ret = 0; \ > + u64 delay = hyp_clock_ns() + ARM_SMMU_POLL_TIMEOUT_US * 1000; \ Does it help to lower the risk for the 128-bits fallback if we keep the resolution to _us? Also, ARM_SMMU_POLL_TIMEOUT_US seems to be 1s. Blocking that long at EL2 is really terrible. Any chance to lower that? > + \ > + while (!(_cond)) { \ > + if (use_wfe) { \ > + wfe(); \ > + if ((_cond)) \ nit: I believe there's no need for the double () here is there? > + break; \ > + } else { \ > + cpu_relax(); \ > + } \ > + if (hyp_clock_ns() >= delay) { \ > + __ret = -ETIMEDOUT; \ > + break; \ > + } \ > + } \ > + __ret; \ > +}) > + [...]