linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 11/14] arm64: Move the ASID allocator code in a separate file

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190919151844.GG1013538@lophozonia>
Date:   Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:18:44 +0200
From:   Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
To:     Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>, christoffer.dall@....com,
        Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@....com>,
        Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>, gary@...yguo.net,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, suzuki.poulose@....com,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Anup Patel <anup.Patel@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, james.morse@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 11/14] arm64: Move the ASID allocator code in a
 separate file

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 09:07:15PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> > The solution I had to this problem is pinning the ASID [1] used by the
> > IOMMU, to prevent the CPU from recycling the ASID on rollover. This way
> > the CPU doesn't have to wait for IOMMU invalidations to complete, when
> > scheduling a task that might not even have anything to do with the IOMMU.
> >
> 
> > In the Arm SMMU, ASID and IOASID (PASID) are separate identifiers. IOASID
> > indexes an entry in the context descriptor table, which contains the ASID.
> > So with unpinned shared ASID you don't need to invalidate the ATC on
> > rollover, since the IOASID doesn't change, but you do need to modify the
> > context descriptor and invalidate cached versions of it.
> The terminology confused me a lot. I perfer use PASID for IOMMU and
> ASID is for CPU.
> Arm's entry of the context descriptor table contains a "IOASID"

The terminology I've been using so far is different:
* IOASID is PASID
* The entry in the context descriptor table contains an ASID, which
  is either "shared" with CPUs or "private" to the SMMU (the SMMU spec
  says "shared" or "non-shared").
* So the CPU and SMMU TLBs use ASIDs, and the PCI ATC uses IOASID

> IOASID != ASID for CPU_TLB and IOMMU_TLB.
> 
> When you say "since the IOASID doesn't change",Is it PASID or my IOASID ? -_*!

I was talking about PASID. Maybe we can drop "IOASID" and talk only
about ASID and PASID :)

> PASID in PCI-sig was used to determine transfer address space.
> For intel, the entry which is indexed by PASID also contain S1/S2.PGD
> and DID(VMID).
> For arm, the entry which is indexed by PASID only contain S1.PGD and
> IOASID. Compare to Intel Vt-d Scalable mode, arm's design can't
> support PCI Virtual Function.

The SMMU does support PCI Virtual Function - an hypervisor can assign a
VF to a guest, and let that guest partition the VF into smaller contexts
by using PASID.  What it can't support is assigning partitions of a PCI
function (VF or PF) to multiple Virtual Machines, since there is a
single S2 PGD per function (in the Stream Table Entry), rather than one
S2 PGD per PASID context.

Thanks,
Jean

> > Once you have pinned ASIDs, you could also declare that IOASID = ASID. I
> > don't remember finding an argument to strictly forbid it, even though ASID
> > and IOASID have different sizes on Arm (respectively 8/16 and 20 bits).
> ASID and IOASID are hard to keep the same between CPU system and IOMMU
> system. So I introduce S1/S2.PGD.PPN as a bridge between CPUs and
> IOMMUs.
> See my proposal [1]
> 
> 1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/1568896556-28769-1-git-send-email-guoren@kernel.org/T/#u
> -- 
> Best Regards
>  Guo Ren
> 
> ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/