[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB5276FDC375685CE04A7AD93B8CD6A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 08:52:49 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
"cohuck@...hat.com" <cohuck@...hat.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
"chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
"yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>,
"peterx@...hat.com" <peterx@...hat.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
"lulu@...hat.com" <lulu@...hat.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"Duan, Zhenzhong" <zhenzhong.duan@...el.com>,
"Martins, Joao" <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 08/17] iommufd: Always setup MSI and anforce cc on
kernel-managed domains
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 7:58 PM
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 08:48:03AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2023 8:45 AM
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 01:16:35AM -0700, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > > From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2023 3:51 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Now enforce_cache_coherency and msi_cookie are kernel-managed
> hwpt
> > > > > things.
> > > > > So, they should be only setup on kernel-managed domains. If the
> > > attaching
> > > > > domain is a user-managed domain, redirect the hwpt to hwpt->parent
> to
> > > do
> > > > > it correctly.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No redirection. The parent should already have the configuration done
> > > > when it's created. It shouldn't be triggered in the nesting path.
> > >
> > > iommufd_hw_pagetable_enforce_cc() is not only called in alloc(),
> > > but also in hwpt_attach/replace() if cc is not enforced by the
> > > alloc() because the idev that initiates the hwpt_alloc() might
> > > not have idev->enforce_cache_coherency. Only when another idev
> > > that has idev->enforce_cache_coherency attaches to the shared
> > > hwpt, the cc configuration would be done.
> >
> > is this a bug already? If the 1st device doesn't have enforce_cc in its
> > iommu, setting the snp bit in the hwpt would lead to reserved
> > bit violation.
>
> I suspect there are technically some gaps in the intel driver, yes..
double checked. intel driver is doing right thing now:
intel_iommu_enforce_cache_coherency()
domain_support_force_snooping()
static bool domain_support_force_snooping(struct dmar_domain *domain)
{
struct device_domain_info *info;
bool support = true;
assert_spin_locked(&domain->lock);
list_for_each_entry(info, &domain->devices, link) {
if (!ecap_sc_support(info->iommu->ecap)) {
support = false;
break;
}
}
return support;
}
>
> > another problem is that intel_iommu_enforce_cache_coherency()
> > doesn't update existing entries. It only sets a domain flag to affect
> > future mappings. so it means the 2nd idev is also broken.
>
> This is such a gap, intel driver should not permit that.
yes. @Baolu, can you add a fix?
>
> > The simplest option is to follow vfio type1 i.e. don't mix devices
> > with different enforce_cc in one domain.
>
> This is why I wanted to get rid of this bad mechanism going forward.
>
> Manually created hwpt should have a manual specification of cc and
> then we don't have so many problems.
>
> It means userspace needs to compute if they want to use CC or not, but
> userspace already needs to figure this out since without autodomains
> it must create two hwpts manually anyhow.
>
Now there is no interface reporting enforce_cc to userspace.
Actually the user doesn't need to know enforce_cc. As long as there is
an attach incompatibility error the user has to create a 2nd hwpt for
the to-be-attached device then enforce_cc will be handled automatically
in hwpt_alloc.
I prefer to removing enforce_cc in attach fn completely then no parent
trick in this patch. Just keep it in hwpt_alloc and leave to iommu driver to
figure out the attaching compatibility:
- attaching a idev with matching enforce_cc as hwpt is always allowed.
- attaching a idev w/o enforce_cc to a hwpt with enforce_cc is rejected.
- attaching a idev w/ enforce_cc to a hwpt w/o enforce_cc succeeds with
hwpt continuing to be w/o enforce_cc. No promotion.
above has been guaranteed by intel iommu driver.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists