Message-ID: <fd9da4cd-b395-fe06-c056-7ffc9f1f55cf@deltatee.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:21:46 -0600
From:   Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Cc:     Minturn Dave B <dave.b.minturn@...el.com>,
        Martin Oliveira <martin.oliveira@...eticom.com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <ckulkarnilinux@...il.com>,
        Jason Ekstrand <jason@...kstrand.net>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Xiong Jianxin <jianxin.xiong@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 08/21] iommu/dma: support PCI P2PDMA pages in dma-iommu
 map_sg



On 2022-06-30 08:56, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-06-29 23:41, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2022-06-29 13:15, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> On 2022-06-29 16:57, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2022-06-29 06:07, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-06-15 17:12, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>>> When a PCI P2PDMA page is seen, set the IOVA length of the segment
>>>>>> to zero so that it is not mapped into the IOVA. Then, in
>>>>>> finalise_sg(),
>>>>>> apply the appropriate bus address to the segment. The IOVA is not
>>>>>> created if the scatterlist only consists of P2PDMA pages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A P2PDMA page may have three possible outcomes when being mapped:
>>>>>>      1) If the data path between the two devices doesn't go through
>>>>>>         the root port, then it should be mapped with a PCI bus
>>>>>> address
>>>>>>      2) If the data path goes through the host bridge, it should be
>>>>>> mapped
>>>>>>         normally with an IOMMU IOVA.
>>>>>>      3) It is not possible for the two devices to communicate and
>>>>>> thus
>>>>>>         the mapping operation should fail (and it will return
>>>>>> -EREMOTEIO).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Similar to dma-direct, the sg_dma_mark_pci_p2pdma() flag is used to
>>>>>> indicate bus address segments. On unmap, P2PDMA segments are skipped
>>>>>> over when determining the start and end IOVA addresses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With this change, the flags variable in the dma_map_ops is set to
>>>>>> DMA_F_PCI_P2PDMA_SUPPORTED to indicate support for P2PDMA pages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 68
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>>>>>> index f90251572a5d..b01ca0c6a7ab 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>>>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>>>>>     #include <linux/iova.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/irq.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/list_sort.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/memremap.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/mm.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/mutex.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/pci.h>
>>>>>> @@ -1062,6 +1063,16 @@ static int __finalise_sg(struct device *dev,
>>>>>> struct scatterlist *sg, int nents,
>>>>>>             sg_dma_address(s) = DMA_MAPPING_ERROR;
>>>>>>             sg_dma_len(s) = 0;
>>>>>>     +        if (is_pci_p2pdma_page(sg_page(s)) && !s_iova_len) {
>>>>>
>>>>> Logically, should we not be able to use sg_is_dma_bus_address()
>>>>> here? I
>>>>> think it should be feasible, and simpler, to prepare the p2p segments
>>>>> up-front, such that at this point all we need to do is restore the
>>>>> original length (if even that, see below).
>>>>
>>>> Per my previous email, no, because sg_is_dma_bus_address() is not set
>>>> yet and not meant to tell you something about the page. That flag will
>>>> be set below by pci_p2pdma_map_bus_segment() and then checkd in
>>>> iommu_dma_unmap_sg() to determine if the dma_address in the segment
>>>> needs to be unmapped.
>>>
>>> I know it's not set yet as-is; I'm suggesting things should be
>>> restructured so that it *would be*. In the logical design of this code,
>>> the DMA addresses are effectively determined in iommu_dma_map_sg(), and
>>> __finalise_sg() merely converts them from a relative to an absolute form
>>> (along with undoing the other trickery). Thus the call to
>>> pci_p2pdma_map_bus_segment() absolutely belongs in the main
>>> iommu_map_sg() loop.
>>
>> I don't see how that can work: __finalise_sg() does more than convert
>> them from relative to absolute, it also figures out which SG entry will
>> contain which dma_address segment. Which segment a P2PDMA address needs
>> to be programmed into depends on the how 'cur' is calculated which in
>> turn depends on things like seg_mask and max_len. This calculation is
>> not done in iommu_dma_map_sg() so I don't see how there's any hope of
>> assigning the bus address for the P2P segments in that function.
>>
>> If there's a way to restructure things so that's possible that I'm not
>> seeing, I'm open to it but it's certainly not immediately obvious.
> 
> Huh? It's still virtually the same thing; iommu_dma_map_sg() calls
> pci_p2pdma_map_bus_segment(s) and sets s->length to 0 if
> PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_BUS_ADDR, then __finalise_sg() can use
> sg_is_dma_bus_address(s) in place of is_pci_p2pdma_page(sg_page(s)), and
> just propagate the DMA address and original length from s to cur.
> 
> Here you've written a patch which looks to correctly interrupt any
> ongoing concatenation state and convey some data from the given input
> segment to the appropriate output segment, so I'm baffled by why you'd
> think you couldn't do what you've already done.

Ah, I understand now, thanks for the patience. It took me a couple of
read throughs before I got it, but I figured it out and now have a
working implementation that looks really nice. It's a big improvement
not needing the two different P2PDMA helpers.

I'll send a v8 of just the first 13 patches next week after a bit more
testing. I've put a draft git branch here if you want to look at it
before that:

https://github.com/sbates130272/linux-p2pmem  p2pdma_map_v8

Thanks!

Logan

Powered by blists - more mailing lists