[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b56621da-0f8a-06d5-15a1-7034e4274620@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 12:35:09 +0000
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>, sthemmin@...rosoft.com,
kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com, wei.liu@...nel.org,
decui@...rosoft.com, rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, robh@...nel.org, kw@...ux.com,
bhelgaas@...gle.com, hch@....de, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] PCI: hv: Propagate coherence from VMbus device to
PCI device
On 2022-03-24 12:23, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-03-23 20:31, Michael Kelley wrote:
>> PCI pass-thru devices in a Hyper-V VM are represented as a VMBus
>> device and as a PCI device. The coherence of the VMbus device is
>> set based on the VMbus node in ACPI, but the PCI device has no
>> ACPI node and defaults to not hardware coherent. This results
>> in extra software coherence management overhead on ARM64 when
>> devices are hardware coherent.
>>
>> Fix this by setting up the PCI host bus so that normal
>> PCI mechanisms will propagate the coherence of the VMbus
>> device to the PCI device. There's no effect on x86/x64 where
>> devices are always hardware coherent.
>
> Honestly, I don't hate this :)
>
> It seems conceptually accurate, as far as I understand, and in
> functional terms I'm starting to think it might even be the most correct
> approach anyway. In the physical world we might be surprised to find the
> PCI side of a host bridge
And of course by "the PCI side of a host bridge" I think I actually mean
"a PCI root bus", because in my sloppy terminology I'm thinking about
hardware bridging from PCI(e) to some SoC-internal protocol, which does
not have to imply an actual PCI-visible Host Bridge device...
Robin.
> behind anything other than some platform/ACPI
> device representing the other side of a physical host bridge or root
> complex, but who's to say that a paravirtual world can't present a more
> abstract topology? Either way, a one-line way of tying in to the
> standard flow is hard to turn down.
>
> Acked-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c | 9 +++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
>> b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
>> index ae0bc2f..88b3b56 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c
>> @@ -3404,6 +3404,15 @@ static int hv_pci_probe(struct hv_device *hdev,
>> hbus->bridge->domain_nr = dom;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86
>> hbus->sysdata.domain = dom;
>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_ARM64)
>> + /*
>> + * Set the PCI bus parent to be the corresponding VMbus
>> + * device. Then the VMbus device will be assigned as the
>> + * ACPI companion in pcibios_root_bridge_prepare() and
>> + * pci_dma_configure() will propagate device coherence
>> + * information to devices created on the bus.
>> + */
>> + hbus->sysdata.parent = hdev->device.parent;
>> #endif
>> hbus->hdev = hdev;
> _______________________________________________
> iommu mailing list
> iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists