[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <746c64bffa60e18b34075f09881946e0@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 21:36:12 +0530
From: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Krishna Reddy <vdumpa@...dia.com>,
Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] iommu/arm-smmu: Optimize ->tlb_flush_walk() for qcom
implementation
On 2021-08-11 21:23, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2021-08-11 11:30, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 11:37:25AM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> index f7da8953afbe..3904b598e0f9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
>>> @@ -327,9 +327,16 @@ static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_s2(unsigned
>>> long iova, size_t size,
>>> static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_walk_s1(unsigned long iova, size_t
>>> size,
>>> size_t granule, void *cookie)
>>> {
>>> - arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_s1(iova, size, granule, cookie,
>>> - ARM_SMMU_CB_S1_TLBIVA);
>>> - arm_smmu_tlb_sync_context(cookie);
>>> + struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = cookie;
>>> + struct arm_smmu_cfg *cfg = &smmu_domain->cfg;
>>> +
>>> + if (cfg->flush_walk_prefer_tlbiasid) {
>>> + arm_smmu_tlb_inv_context_s1(cookie);
>>
>> Hmm, this introduces an unconditional wmb() if tlbiasid is preferred.
>> I
>> think that should be predicated on ARM_SMMU_FEAT_COHERENT_WALK like it
>> is
>> for the by-VA ops. Worth doing as a separate patch.
>>
>>> + } else {
>>> + arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_s1(iova, size, granule, cookie,
>>> + ARM_SMMU_CB_S1_TLBIVA);
>>> + arm_smmu_tlb_sync_context(cookie);
>>> + }
>>> }
>>> static void arm_smmu_tlb_add_page_s1(struct iommu_iotlb_gather
>>> *gather,
>>> @@ -765,8 +772,10 @@ static int arm_smmu_init_domain_context(struct
>>> iommu_domain *domain,
>>> .iommu_dev = smmu->dev,
>>> };
>>> - if (!iommu_get_dma_strict(domain))
>>> + if (!iommu_get_dma_strict(domain)) {
>>> pgtbl_cfg.quirks |= IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT;
>>> + cfg->flush_walk_prefer_tlbiasid = true;
>>
>> This is going to interact badly with Robin's series to allow dynamic
>> transition to non-strict mode, as we don't have a mechanism to switch
>> over to the by-ASID behaviour. Yes, it should _work_, but it's ugly
>> having
>> different TLBI behaviour just because of the how the domain became
>> non-strict.
>>
>> Robin -- I think this originated from your idea at [1]. Any idea how
>> to make
>> it work with your other series, or shall we drop this part for now and
>> leave
>> the TLB invalidation behaviour the same for now?
>
> Yeah, I'd say drop it - I'm currently half an hour into a first
> attempt at removing io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk() entirely, which would
> make it moot for non-strict anyway.
>
I have dropped it and sent a v5.
Thanks,
Sai
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
Powered by blists - more mailing lists