From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] iommu/vt-d: Add cache tag assignment interface
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2024 20:55:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bc76bb64-8304-4fdf-ae16-03f3e545fd67@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB5276A6DDE82623A32FF80F4F8C3B2@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for your review comments.
On 3/28/24 3:12 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2024 10:17 AM
>>
>> +enum cache_tag_type {
>> + CACHE_TAG_TYPE_IOTLB,
>> + CACHE_TAG_TYPE_DEVTLB,
>> + CACHE_TAG_TYPE_PARENT_IOTLB,
>> + CACHE_TAG_TYPE_PARENT_DEVTLB,
>> +};
>
> '_TYPE_' can be removed to make it shorter
Okay.
>
>> +
>> +/* Checks if an existing cache tag can be reused for a new association. */
>> +static bool cache_tag_reusable(struct cache_tag *tag, u16 domain_id,
>> + struct intel_iommu *iommu, struct device *dev,
>> + ioasid_t pasid, enum cache_tag_type type)
>
> cache_tage_match()
Okay.
>
>> +{
>> + if (tag->type != type)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + if (tag->domain_id != domain_id || tag->pasid != pasid)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + if (type == CACHE_TAG_TYPE_IOTLB)
>> + return tag->iommu == iommu;
>> +
>> + if (type == CACHE_TAG_TYPE_DEVTLB)
>> + return tag->dev == dev;
>> +
>> + return false;
>
> why do you disallow PARENT_TYPE from reusing? It's not uncommon
> to have two devices attached to a same nested domain hence with
> the same parent domain. Disallowing tag reuse implies unnecessarily
> duplicated cache flushes...
PARENT_TYPE could be reused. The new helper looks like the following:
/* Checks if an existing cache tag can be reused for a new association. */
static bool cache_tage_match(struct cache_tag *tag, u16 domain_id,
struct intel_iommu *iommu, struct device
*dev,
ioasid_t pasid, enum cache_tag_type type)
{
if (tag->type != type)
return false;
if (tag->domain_id != domain_id || tag->pasid != pasid)
return false;
if (type == CACHE_TAG_IOTLB || type == CACHE_TAG_PARENT_IOTLB)
return tag->iommu == iommu;
if (type == CACHE_TAG_DEVTLB || type == CACHE_TAG_PARENT_DEVTLB)
return tag->dev == dev;
return false;
}
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* Assign a cache tag with specified type to domain. */
>> +static int cache_tag_assign(struct dmar_domain *domain, u16 did,
>> + struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid,
>> + enum cache_tag_type type)
>> +{
>> + struct device_domain_info *info = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
>> + struct intel_iommu *iommu = info->iommu;
>> + struct cache_tag *tag, *temp;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> +
>> + tag = kzalloc(sizeof(*tag), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!tag)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + tag->type = type;
>> + tag->iommu = iommu;
>> + tag->dev = dev;
>
> should we set tag->dev only for DEVTLB type? It's a bit confusing to set
> it for IOTLB type which doesn't care about device. Actually doing so
> is instead misleading as the 1st device creating the tag may have been
> detached but then it will still show up in the trace when the last device
> detach destroying the tag.
For IOTLB types, perhaps we could add a struct device pointer for the
iommu. This way, the tag->dev could more directly indicate the device
implementing the cache.
>
>> +static int __cache_tag_assign_parent_domain(struct dmar_domain
>> *domain, u16 did,
>> + struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid)
>
> this pair is similar to the earlier one except the difference on type.
>
> what about keeping just one pair which accepts a 'parent' argument to
> decide the type internally?
Okay, let try to refine it.
>
>
>> +/*
>> + * Assigns cache tags to a domain when it's associated with a device's
>> + * PASID using a specific domain ID.
>
> s/Assigns/Assign/
Done.
>
>> +
>> + did = domain_id_iommu(domain, iommu);
>> + ret = cache_tag_assign_domain(domain, did, dev,
>> IOMMU_NO_PASID);
>
> there are many occurrences of this pattern. What about passing in
> a 'iommu' parameter and getting 'did' inside the helper? for svm
> it can be specialized internally too.
Perhaps, let me try it later and see what the code looks like.
>
>> @@ -4607,10 +4623,11 @@ static void
>> intel_iommu_remove_dev_pasid(struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid)
>> */
>> if (domain->type == IOMMU_DOMAIN_SVA) {
>> intel_svm_remove_dev_pasid(dev, pasid);
>> + cache_tag_unassign_domain(dmar_domain,
>> + FLPT_DEFAULT_DID, dev, pasid);
>
> is it correct to destroy the tag before teardown completes, e.g. iotlb still
> needs to be flushed in intel_pasid_tear_down_entry()?
You are right. iotlb still needs to be there until the teardown
completes. I will investigate this more later.
Beset regards,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-06 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-25 2:16 [PATCH 00/12] Consolidate domain cache invalidation Lu Baolu
2024-03-25 2:16 ` [PATCH 01/12] iommu/vt-d: Add cache tag assignment interface Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:12 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-06 12:55 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2024-04-07 4:35 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-08 2:28 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-10 15:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-10 23:14 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-11 13:17 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-11 13:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-11 12:10 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-11 12:38 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-12 3:38 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-03-25 2:16 ` [PATCH 02/12] iommu/vt-d: Add cache tag invalidation helpers Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:39 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-07 5:33 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-08 2:33 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-08 2:53 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-08 3:14 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-03-25 2:16 ` [PATCH 03/12] iommu/vt-d: Add trace events for cache tag interface Lu Baolu
2024-03-25 2:16 ` [PATCH 04/12] iommu/vt-d: Use cache_tag_flush_all() in flush_iotlb_all Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:47 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-07 5:56 ` Baolu Lu
2024-03-25 2:16 ` [PATCH 05/12] iommu/vt-d: Use cache_tag_flush_range() in tlb_sync Lu Baolu
2024-03-25 2:16 ` [PATCH 06/12] iommu/vt-d: Use cache_tag_flush_cm_range() in iotlb_sync_map Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:48 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-07 6:41 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-08 2:51 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-08 2:57 ` Baolu Lu
2024-03-25 2:17 ` [PATCH 07/12] iommu/vt-d: Cleanup use of iommu_flush_iotlb_psi() Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:50 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-07 7:06 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-08 2:57 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-03-25 2:17 ` [PATCH 08/12] iommu/vt-d: Use cache_tag_flush_range() in cache_invalidate_user Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:54 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-07 7:15 ` Baolu Lu
2024-03-25 2:17 ` [PATCH 09/12] iommu/vt-d: Use cache helpers in arch_invalidate_secondary_tlbs Lu Baolu
2024-03-25 2:17 ` [PATCH 10/12] iommu/vt-d: Retire intel_svm_dev Lu Baolu
2024-03-25 2:17 ` [PATCH 11/12] iommu: Add ops->domain_alloc_sva() Lu Baolu
2024-03-25 2:17 ` [PATCH 12/12] iommu/vt-d: Retire struct intel_svm Lu Baolu
2024-03-28 7:59 ` [PATCH 00/12] Consolidate domain cache invalidation Tian, Kevin
2024-04-07 7:28 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-08 3:03 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-08 3:05 ` 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=bc76bb64-8304-4fdf-ae16-03f3e545fd67@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.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=tina.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
/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