From: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, "Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Jean-Philippe Brucker" <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>, <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
<kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/12] iommu: Merge iopf_device_param into iommu_fault_param
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 20:32:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7978fbf-af12-4787-832f-366b0fddc399@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231115030226.16700-6-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
On 2023/11/15 11:02, Lu Baolu wrote:
> The struct dev_iommu contains two pointers, fault_param and iopf_param.
> The fault_param pointer points to a data structure that is used to store
> pending faults that are awaiting responses. The iopf_param pointer points
> to a data structure that is used to store partial faults that are part of
> a Page Request Group.
>
> The fault_param and iopf_param pointers are essentially duplicate. This
> causes memory waste. Merge the iopf_device_param pointer into the
> iommu_fault_param pointer to consolidate the code and save memory. The
> consolidated pointer would be allocated on demand when the device driver
> enables the iopf on device, and would be freed after iopf is disabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
> ---
> include/linux/iommu.h | 18 ++++--
> drivers/iommu/io-pgfault.c | 113 ++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 34 ++---------
> 3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
> index 79775859af42..108ab50da1ad 100644
> --- a/include/linux/iommu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ struct notifier_block;
> struct iommu_sva;
> struct iommu_fault_event;
> struct iommu_dma_cookie;
> +struct iopf_queue;
>
> #define IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_READ (1 << 0) /* read */
> #define IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_WRITE (1 << 1) /* write */
> @@ -590,21 +591,31 @@ struct iommu_fault_event {
> * struct iommu_fault_param - per-device IOMMU fault data
> * @handler: Callback function to handle IOMMU faults at device level
> * @data: handler private data
> - * @faults: holds the pending faults which needs response
> * @lock: protect pending faults list
> + * @dev: the device that owns this param
> + * @queue: IOPF queue
> + * @queue_list: index into queue->devices
> + * @partial: faults that are part of a Page Request Group for which the last
> + * request hasn't been submitted yet.
> + * @faults: holds the pending faults which needs response
since you already moved this line, maybe fix this typo as well.
s/needs/need/
> */
> struct iommu_fault_param {
> iommu_dev_fault_handler_t handler;
> void *data;
> + struct mutex lock;
can you share why move this line up? It results in a line move as well
in the above kdoc.
> +
> + struct device *dev;
> + struct iopf_queue *queue;
> + struct list_head queue_list;
> +
> + struct list_head partial;
> struct list_head faults;
> - struct mutex lock;
> };
>
> /**
> * struct dev_iommu - Collection of per-device IOMMU data
> *
> * @fault_param: IOMMU detected device fault reporting data
> - * @iopf_param: I/O Page Fault queue and data
> * @fwspec: IOMMU fwspec data
> * @iommu_dev: IOMMU device this device is linked to
> * @priv: IOMMU Driver private data
> @@ -620,7 +631,6 @@ struct iommu_fault_param {
> struct dev_iommu {
> struct mutex lock;
> struct iommu_fault_param *fault_param;
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param;
> struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec;
> struct iommu_device *iommu_dev;
> void *priv;
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgfault.c b/drivers/iommu/io-pgfault.c
> index 24b5545352ae..b1cf28055525 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgfault.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgfault.c
> @@ -25,21 +25,6 @@ struct iopf_queue {
> struct mutex lock;
> };
>
> -/**
> - * struct iopf_device_param - IO Page Fault data attached to a device
> - * @dev: the device that owns this param
> - * @queue: IOPF queue
> - * @queue_list: index into queue->devices
> - * @partial: faults that are part of a Page Request Group for which the last
> - * request hasn't been submitted yet.
> - */
> -struct iopf_device_param {
> - struct device *dev;
> - struct iopf_queue *queue;
> - struct list_head queue_list;
> - struct list_head partial;
> -};
> -
> struct iopf_fault {
> struct iommu_fault fault;
> struct list_head list;
> @@ -144,7 +129,7 @@ int iommu_queue_iopf(struct iommu_fault *fault, void *cookie)
> int ret;
> struct iopf_group *group;
> struct iopf_fault *iopf, *next;
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param;
> + struct iommu_fault_param *iopf_param;
>
> struct device *dev = cookie;
> struct dev_iommu *param = dev->iommu;
> @@ -159,7 +144,7 @@ int iommu_queue_iopf(struct iommu_fault *fault, void *cookie)
> * As long as we're holding param->lock, the queue can't be unlinked
> * from the device and therefore cannot disappear.
> */
> - iopf_param = param->iopf_param;
> + iopf_param = param->fault_param;
> if (!iopf_param)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> @@ -229,14 +214,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_queue_iopf);
> int iopf_queue_flush_dev(struct device *dev)
> {
> int ret = 0;
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param;
> + struct iommu_fault_param *iopf_param;
> struct dev_iommu *param = dev->iommu;
>
> if (!param)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> mutex_lock(¶m->lock);
> - iopf_param = param->iopf_param;
> + iopf_param = param->fault_param;
> if (iopf_param)
> flush_workqueue(iopf_param->queue->wq);
> else
> @@ -260,7 +245,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iopf_queue_flush_dev);
> int iopf_queue_discard_partial(struct iopf_queue *queue)
> {
> struct iopf_fault *iopf, *next;
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param;
> + struct iommu_fault_param *iopf_param;
>
> if (!queue)
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -287,34 +272,38 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iopf_queue_discard_partial);
> */
> int iopf_queue_add_device(struct iopf_queue *queue, struct device *dev)
> {
> - int ret = -EBUSY;
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param;
> + int ret = 0;
> struct dev_iommu *param = dev->iommu;
> -
> - if (!param)
> - return -ENODEV;
> -
> - iopf_param = kzalloc(sizeof(*iopf_param), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!iopf_param)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> -
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&iopf_param->partial);
> - iopf_param->queue = queue;
> - iopf_param->dev = dev;
> + struct iommu_fault_param *fault_param;
>
> mutex_lock(&queue->lock);
> mutex_lock(¶m->lock);
> - if (!param->iopf_param) {
> - list_add(&iopf_param->queue_list, &queue->devices);
> - param->iopf_param = iopf_param;
> - ret = 0;
> + if (param->fault_param) {
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + goto done_unlock;
> }
> +
> + get_device(dev);
noticed the old code has this get as well. :) but still want to ask if
it is really need.
> + fault_param = kzalloc(sizeof(*fault_param), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!fault_param) {
> + put_device(dev);
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto done_unlock;
> + }
> +
> + mutex_init(&fault_param->lock);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fault_param->faults);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fault_param->partial);
> + fault_param->dev = dev;
> + list_add(&fault_param->queue_list, &queue->devices);
> + fault_param->queue = queue;
> +
> + param->fault_param = fault_param;
> +
> +done_unlock:
> mutex_unlock(¶m->lock);
> mutex_unlock(&queue->lock);
>
> - if (ret)
> - kfree(iopf_param);
> -
> return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iopf_queue_add_device);
> @@ -330,34 +319,42 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iopf_queue_add_device);
> */
> int iopf_queue_remove_device(struct iopf_queue *queue, struct device *dev)
> {
> - int ret = -EINVAL;
> + int ret = 0;
> struct iopf_fault *iopf, *next;
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param;
> struct dev_iommu *param = dev->iommu;
> -
> - if (!param || !queue)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + struct iommu_fault_param *fault_param = param->fault_param;
>
> mutex_lock(&queue->lock);
> mutex_lock(¶m->lock);
> - iopf_param = param->iopf_param;
> - if (iopf_param && iopf_param->queue == queue) {
> - list_del(&iopf_param->queue_list);
> - param->iopf_param = NULL;
> - ret = 0;
> + if (!fault_param) {
> + ret = -ENODEV;
> + goto unlock;
> }
> - mutex_unlock(¶m->lock);
> - mutex_unlock(&queue->lock);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> +
> + if (fault_param->queue != queue) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> +
> + if (!list_empty(&fault_param->faults)) {
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
> +
> + list_del(&fault_param->queue_list);
>
> /* Just in case some faults are still stuck */
> - list_for_each_entry_safe(iopf, next, &iopf_param->partial, list)
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(iopf, next, &fault_param->partial, list)
> kfree(iopf);
>
> - kfree(iopf_param);
> + param->fault_param = NULL;
> + kfree(fault_param);
> + put_device(dev);
> +unlock:
> + mutex_unlock(¶m->lock);
> + mutex_unlock(&queue->lock);
>
> - return 0;
> + return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iopf_queue_remove_device);
>
> @@ -403,7 +400,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iopf_queue_alloc);
> */
> void iopf_queue_free(struct iopf_queue *queue)
> {
> - struct iopf_device_param *iopf_param, *next;
> + struct iommu_fault_param *iopf_param, *next;
>
> if (!queue)
> return;
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> index f24513e2b025..9c9eacfa6761 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> @@ -1326,27 +1326,18 @@ int iommu_register_device_fault_handler(struct device *dev,
> struct dev_iommu *param = dev->iommu;
> int ret = 0;
>
> - if (!param)
> + if (!param || !param->fault_param)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> mutex_lock(¶m->lock);
> /* Only allow one fault handler registered for each device */
> - if (param->fault_param) {
> + if (param->fault_param->handler) {
> ret = -EBUSY;
> goto done_unlock;
> }
>
> - get_device(dev);
> - param->fault_param = kzalloc(sizeof(*param->fault_param), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!param->fault_param) {
> - put_device(dev);
> - ret = -ENOMEM;
> - goto done_unlock;
> - }
> param->fault_param->handler = handler;
> param->fault_param->data = data;
> - mutex_init(¶m->fault_param->lock);
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(¶m->fault_param->faults);
>
> done_unlock:
> mutex_unlock(¶m->lock);
> @@ -1367,29 +1358,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_register_device_fault_handler);
> int iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct dev_iommu *param = dev->iommu;
> - int ret = 0;
>
> - if (!param)
> + if (!param || !param->fault_param)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> mutex_lock(¶m->lock);
> -
> - if (!param->fault_param)
> - goto unlock;
> -
> - /* we cannot unregister handler if there are pending faults */
> - if (!list_empty(¶m->fault_param->faults)) {
> - ret = -EBUSY;
> - goto unlock;
> - }
> -
> - kfree(param->fault_param);
> - param->fault_param = NULL;
> - put_device(dev);
> -unlock:
> + param->fault_param->handler = NULL;
> + param->fault_param->data = NULL;
> mutex_unlock(¶m->lock);
>
> - return ret;
> + return 0;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler);
>
--
Regards,
Yi Liu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-04 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-15 3:02 [PATCH v7 00/12] iommu: Prepare to deliver page faults to user space Lu Baolu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 01/12] iommu: Move iommu fault data to linux/iommu.h Lu Baolu
2023-12-04 10:52 ` Yi Liu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 02/12] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Remove unrecoverable faults reporting Lu Baolu
2023-12-01 15:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-04 10:54 ` Yi Liu
2023-12-05 11:48 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 03/12] iommu: Remove unrecoverable fault data Lu Baolu
2023-12-04 10:58 ` Yi Liu
2023-12-05 11:55 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 04/12] iommu: Cleanup iopf data structure definitions Lu Baolu
2023-12-04 11:03 ` Yi Liu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 05/12] iommu: Merge iopf_device_param into iommu_fault_param Lu Baolu
2023-12-04 12:32 ` Yi Liu [this message]
2023-12-05 12:01 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 06/12] iommu: Remove iommu_[un]register_device_fault_handler() Lu Baolu
2023-12-04 12:36 ` Yi Liu
2023-12-05 12:09 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 07/12] iommu: Merge iommu_fault_event and iopf_fault Lu Baolu
2023-12-01 19:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-04 12:40 ` Yi Liu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 08/12] iommu: Prepare for separating SVA and IOPF Lu Baolu
2023-12-05 7:10 ` Yi Liu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 09/12] iommu: Make iommu_queue_iopf() more generic Lu Baolu
2023-12-01 19:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-05 7:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-12-05 12:13 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 10/12] iommu: Separate SVA and IOPF Lu Baolu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 11/12] iommu: Consolidate per-device fault data management Lu Baolu
2023-12-01 19:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-04 0:58 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-15 3:02 ` [PATCH v7 12/12] iommu: Improve iopf_queue_flush_dev() Lu Baolu
2023-12-01 20:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-03 8:53 ` Baolu Lu
2023-12-03 14:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-04 1:32 ` Baolu Lu
2023-12-04 5:37 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-12-04 13:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-05 1:32 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-12-05 1:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-05 3:23 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-12-05 15:52 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-04 13:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-04 3:46 ` Baolu Lu
2023-12-04 13:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-12-05 1:13 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-24 6:30 ` [PATCH v7 00/12] iommu: Prepare to deliver page faults to user space liulongfang
2023-11-24 12:01 ` Baolu Lu
2023-11-25 4:05 ` liulongfang
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=d7978fbf-af12-4787-832f-366b0fddc399@intel.com \
--to=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@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