[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9b221cf-1c7f-9f95-133b-dca65197b6c2@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 18:30:15 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Srinath Mannam <srinath.mannam@...adcom.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu: Add module parameter to set msi iova
address
On 2020-05-27 17:03, Srinath Mannam wrote:
> This patch gives the provision to change default value of MSI IOVA base
> to platform's suitable IOVA using module parameter. The present
> hardcoded MSI IOVA base may not be the accessible IOVA ranges of platform.
That in itself doesn't seem entirely unreasonable; IIRC the current
address is just an arbitrary choice to fit nicely into Qemu's memory
map, and there was always the possibility that it wouldn't suit everything.
> Since commit aadad097cd46 ("iommu/dma: Reserve IOVA for PCIe inaccessible
> DMA address"), inaccessible IOVA address ranges parsed from dma-ranges
> property are reserved.
That, however, doesn't seem to fit here; iommu-dma maps MSI doorbells
dynamically, so they aren't affected by reserved regions any more than
regular DMA pages are. In fact, it explicitly ignores the software MSI
region, since as the comment says, it *is* the software that manages those.
The MSI_IOVA_BASE region exists for VFIO, precisely because in that case
the kernel *doesn't* control the address space, but still needs some way
to steal a bit of it for MSIs that the guest doesn't necessarily know
about, and give userspace a fighting chance of knowing what it's taken.
I think at the time we discussed the idea of adding something to the
VFIO uapi such that userspace could move this around if it wanted or
needed to, but decided we could live without that initially. Perhaps now
the time has come?
Robin.
> If any platform has the limitaion to access default MSI IOVA, then it can
> be changed using "arm-smmu.msi_iova_base=0xa0000000" command line argument.
>
> Signed-off-by: Srinath Mannam <srinath.mannam@...adcom.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> index 4f1a350..5e59c9d 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> @@ -72,6 +72,9 @@ static bool disable_bypass =
> module_param(disable_bypass, bool, S_IRUGO);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable_bypass,
> "Disable bypass streams such that incoming transactions from devices that are not attached to an iommu domain will report an abort back to the device and will not be allowed to pass through the SMMU.");
> +static unsigned long msi_iova_base = MSI_IOVA_BASE;
> +module_param(msi_iova_base, ulong, S_IRUGO);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(msi_iova_base, "msi iova base address.");
>
> struct arm_smmu_s2cr {
> struct iommu_group *group;
> @@ -1566,7 +1569,7 @@ static void arm_smmu_get_resv_regions(struct device *dev,
> struct iommu_resv_region *region;
> int prot = IOMMU_WRITE | IOMMU_NOEXEC | IOMMU_MMIO;
>
> - region = iommu_alloc_resv_region(MSI_IOVA_BASE, MSI_IOVA_LENGTH,
> + region = iommu_alloc_resv_region(msi_iova_base, MSI_IOVA_LENGTH,
> prot, IOMMU_RESV_SW_MSI);
> if (!region)
> return;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists