From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
To: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com>
Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
David Edmondson <david.edmondson@oracle.com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] i386/pc: Account IOVA reserved ranges above 4G boundary
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:09:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210623140922.404b280b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21f86eb7-e9db-b7ac-9014-2baa9fd44741@oracle.com>
On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 10:51:59 +0100
Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 6/23/21 10:03 AM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:49:00 +0100
> > Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It is assumed that the whole GPA space is available to be
> >> DMA addressable, within a given address space limit. Since
> >> v5.4 based that is not true, and VFIO will validate whether
> >> the selected IOVA is indeed valid i.e. not reserved by IOMMU
> >> on behalf of some specific devices or platform-defined.
> >>
> >> AMD systems with an IOMMU are examples of such platforms and
> >> particularly may export only these ranges as allowed:
> >>
> >> 0000000000000000 - 00000000fedfffff (0 .. 3.982G)
> >> 00000000fef00000 - 000000fcffffffff (3.983G .. 1011.9G)
> >> 0000010000000000 - ffffffffffffffff (1Tb .. 16Pb)
> >>
> >> We already know of accounting for the 4G hole, albeit if the
> >> guest is big enough we will fail to allocate a >1010G given
> >> the ~12G hole at the 1Tb boundary, reserved for HyperTransport.
> >>
> >> When creating the region above 4G, take into account what
> >> IOVAs are allowed by defining the known allowed ranges
> >> and search for the next free IOVA ranges. When finding a
> >> invalid IOVA we mark them as reserved and proceed to the
> >> next allowed IOVA region.
> >>
> >> After accounting for the 1Tb hole on AMD hosts, mtree should
> >> look like:
> >>
> >> 0000000100000000-000000fcffffffff (prio 0, i/o):
> >> alias ram-above-4g @pc.ram 0000000080000000-000000fc7fffffff
> >> 0000010000000000-000001037fffffff (prio 0, i/o):
> >> alias ram-above-1t @pc.ram 000000fc80000000-000000ffffffffff
> >
> > You are talking here about GPA which is guest specific thing
> > and then somehow it becomes tied to host. For bystanders it's
> > not clear from above commit message how both are related.
> > I'd add here an explicit explanation how AMD host is related GPAs
> > and clarify where you are talking about guest/host side.
> >
> OK, makes sense.
>
> Perhaps using IOVA makes it easier to understand. I said GPA because
> there's an 1:1 mapping between GPA and IOVA (if you're not using vIOMMU).
IOVA may be a too broad term, maybe explain it in terms of GPA and HPA
and why it does matter on each side (host/guest)
> > also what about usecases:
> > * start QEMU with Intel cpu model on AMD host with intel's iommu
>
> In principle it would be less likely to occur. But you would still need
> to mark the same range as reserved. The limitation is on DMA occuring
> on those IOVAs (host or guest) coinciding with that range, so you would
> want to inform the guest that at least those should be avoided.
>
> > * start QEMU with AMD cpu model and AMD's iommu on Intel host
>
> Here you would probably only mark the range, solely for honoring how hardware
> is usually represented. But really, on Intel, nothing stops you from exposing the
> aforementioned range as RAM.
>
> > * start QEMU in TCG mode on AMD host (mostly form qtest point ot view)
> >
> This one is tricky. Because you can hotplug a VFIO device later on,
> I opted for always marking the reserved range. If you don't use VFIO you're good, but
> otherwise you would still need reserved. But I am not sure how qtest is used
> today for testing huge guests.
I do not know if there are VFIO tests in qtest (probably nope, since that
could require a host configured for that), but we can add a test
for his memory quirk (assuming phys-bits won't get in the way)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-23 12:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-22 15:48 [PATCH RFC 0/6] i386/pc: Fix creation of >= 1Tb guests on AMD systems with IOMMU Joao Martins
2021-06-22 15:49 ` [PATCH RFC 1/6] i386/pc: Account IOVA reserved ranges above 4G boundary Joao Martins
2021-06-23 7:11 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 9:37 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-23 11:39 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 13:04 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-28 14:32 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-08-06 10:41 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-23 9:03 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 9:51 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-23 12:09 ` Igor Mammedov [this message]
2021-06-23 13:07 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-28 13:25 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-28 13:43 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-28 15:21 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-24 9:32 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2021-06-28 14:42 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-22 15:49 ` [PATCH RFC 2/6] i386/pc: Round up the hotpluggable memory within valid IOVA ranges Joao Martins
2021-06-22 15:49 ` [PATCH RFC 3/6] pc/cmos: Adjust CMOS above 4G memory size according to 1Tb boundary Joao Martins
2021-06-22 15:49 ` [PATCH RFC 4/6] i386/pc: Keep PCI 64-bit hole within usable IOVA space Joao Martins
2021-06-23 12:30 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 13:22 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-28 15:37 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 16:33 ` Laszlo Ersek
2021-06-25 17:19 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-22 15:49 ` [PATCH RFC 5/6] i386/acpi: Fix SRAT ranges in accordance to usable IOVA Joao Martins
2021-06-22 15:49 ` [PATCH RFC 6/6] i386/pc: Add a machine property for AMD-only enforcing of valid IOVAs Joao Martins
2021-06-23 9:18 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 9:59 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-22 21:16 ` [PATCH RFC 0/6] i386/pc: Fix creation of >= 1Tb guests on AMD systems with IOMMU Alex Williamson
2021-06-23 7:40 ` David Edmondson
2021-06-23 19:13 ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-23 9:30 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-23 11:58 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-06-23 13:15 ` Joao Martins
2021-06-23 19:27 ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-24 9:22 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2021-06-25 16:54 ` Joao Martins
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=20210623140922.404b280b@redhat.com \
--to=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
--cc=david.edmondson@oracle.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).