[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e7535138133c514c77004d64e40b4180@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:53:35 -0500
From: okaya@...eaurora.org
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, timur@...eaurora.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu: add warning when sharing groups
On 2017-02-14 18:51, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:25:22 -0500
> Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>
>> The ACS requirement has been obscured in the current code and is only
>> known by certain individuals who happen to read the code. Print out a
>> warning with ACS path failure when ACS requirement is not met.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> index dbe7f65..049ee0a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> @@ -811,6 +811,9 @@ struct iommu_group *pci_device_group(struct device
>> *dev)
>> if (IS_ERR(group))
>> return NULL;
>>
>> + if (pci_is_root_bus(bus))
>> + dev_warn_once(&pdev->dev, "using shared group due to ACS path
>> failure\n");
>> +
>> return group;
>> }
>>
>
> The premise here is flawed. An IOMMU group based at the root bus
> doesn't necessarily imply a lack of ACS. There are devices on root
> buses, integrated endpoints and root ports. Naturally an IOMMU group
> for these devices needs to be based at the root bus. Additionally,
> there can be IOMMU groups developed around a lack of ACS that don't
> intersect with the root bus. Since this is a warn_once, the false
> positives for root bus devices are going to be enumerated first. On an
> Intel system there's typically a device as 00.0 that will always be
> pointlessly listed first. Also, it's not clear that grouping devices
> together is always wrong, as Robin pointed out in the EHCI/OHCI
> example. Lack of ACS on downtream ports is likely to cause problems,
> especially if that downstream port exposes a slot. Maybe that would be
> a good place to start. Also, what is someone supposed to do when they
> see this error? If we can hope they'll look for the error in the code
> (unlikely) a big comment with useful external links might be
> necessary. Based on how easily vendors ignore kernel warnings, I'm
> dubious there's any value to this path though. Thanks,
Maybe, a better solution would be to add some sentences into vfio.txt
documentation.
I'm ready to drop this patch. I just don't want ACS requirement to be
hidden between the source code.
Would you be willing to do that?
I know I read all pci and vfio documents in the past. I could have
captured this requirement if it was there.
>
> Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists