| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <d7110cff-334f-40cd-9f11-62fafd8d722d@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 18:36:57 +0530
From: Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@...cinc.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Pavan Kondeti
<quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>
CC: <will@...nel.org>, <robin.murphy@....com>, <joro@...tes.org>,
<dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>, <jsnitsel@...hat.com>,
<quic_bjorande@...cinc.com>, <mani@...nel.org>,
<quic_eberman@...cinc.com>, <robdclark@...omium.org>,
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, <robh@...nel.org>,
<vladimir.oltean@....com>, <quic_molvera@...cinc.com>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/5] iommu/arm-smmu: introduction of ACTLR for custom
prefetcher settings
On 1/12/2024 3:31 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 1/11/24 19:09, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/10/2024 11:26 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/10/24 13:55, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/10/2024 4:46 PM, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/10/2024 9:36 AM, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -274,6 +321,21 @@ static const struct of_device_id
>>>>>>> qcom_smmu_client_of_match[] __maybe_unused = {
>>>>>>> static int qcom_smmu_init_context(struct arm_smmu_domain
>>>>>>> *smmu_domain,
>>>>>>> struct io_pgtable_cfg *pgtbl_cfg, struct device *dev)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
>>>>>>> + struct qcom_smmu *qsmmu = to_qcom_smmu(smmu);
>>>>>>> + const struct actlr_variant *actlrvar;
>>>>>>> + int cbndx = smmu_domain->cfg.cbndx;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + if (qsmmu->data->actlrvar) {
>>>>>>> + actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
>>>>>>> + for (; actlrvar->io_start; actlrvar++) {
>>>>>>> + if (actlrvar->io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
>>>>>>> + qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx,
>>>>>>> actlrvar->actlrcfg);
>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This block and the one in qcom_adreno_smmu_init_context() are exactly
>>>>>> the same. Possible to do some refactoring?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I will check if this repeated blocks can be accomodated this into
>>>>> qcom_smmu_set_actlr function if that would be fine.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also adding to this, this might increase the number of indentation
>>>> inside qcom_smmu_set_actlr as well, to around 5. So wouldn't this
>>>> be an issue?
>>>
>>> By the way, we can refactor this:
>>>
>>> if (qsmmu->data->actlrvar) {
>>> actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
>>> for (; actlrvar->io_start; actlrvar++) {
>>> if (actlrvar->io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
>>> qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx, actlrvar->actlrcfg);
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> into
>>>
>>> // add const u8 num_actlrcfgs to struct actrl_variant to
>>> // save on sentinel space:
>>> // sizeof(u8) < sizeof(ptr) + sizeof(resource_size_t)
>>>
>>
>> Git it, Would it be better to add this in struct qcom_smmu_match_data ?
>
> Yes, right.
>
Actually, I noticed now, we can do both the actlr_config (num_actlrcfg
is used) and actlr_var (num_smmu is used) in the similar by storing the
number of elements in each of them.
something like this:
+static const struct actlr_config sc7280_apps_actlr_cfg[] = {
+ { 0x0800, 0x24e1, PREFETCH_DEFAULT | CMTLB },
+ { 0x2000, 0x0163, PREFETCH_DEFAULT | CMTLB },
+ { 0x2080, 0x0461, PREFETCH_DEFAULT | CMTLB },
+ { 0x2100, 0x0161, PREFETCH_DEFAULT | CMTLB },
+ { 0x0900, 0x0407, PREFETCH_SHALLOW | CPRE | CMTLB },
+ { 0x2180, 0x0027, PREFETCH_SHALLOW | CPRE | CMTLB },
+ { 0x1000, 0x07ff, PREFETCH_DEEP | CPRE | CMTLB },
+};
+
+static const struct actlr_config sc7280_gfx_actlr_cfg[] = {
+ { 0x0000, 0x07ff, PREFETCH_SWITCH_GFX | PREFETCH_DEEP | CPRE | CMTLB },
+};
+
+static const struct actlr_variant sc7280_actlr[] = {
+ { .io_start = 0x15000000, .actlrcfg = sc7280_apps_actlr_cfg,
num_actlrcfg = 7 },
+ { .io_start = 0x03da0000, .actlrcfg = sc7280_gfx_actlr_cfg,
num_actlrcfg = 1 },
+};
+
static const struct actlr_config sm8550_apps_actlr_cfg[] = {
{ 0x18a0, 0x0000, PREFETCH_SHALLOW | CPRE | CMTLB },
{ 0x18e0, 0x0000, PREFETCH_SHALLOW | CPRE | CMTLB },
@@ -661,6 +680,13 @@ static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data
sdm845_smmu_500_data = {
/* Also no debug configuration. */
};
+static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data sc7280_smmu_500_impl0_data = {
+ .impl = &qcom_smmu_500_impl,
+ .adreno_impl = &qcom_adreno_smmu_500_impl,
+ .cfg = &qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg,
+ .actlrvar = sc7280_actlr,
+ .num_smmu = 2,
+};
Just for note , there's a small hiccup here as we have to manually
calculate and the number of elements in actlr_config size everytime we
add this info for a new target, won't be an issue though but just a
hindrance to automation (?)
>> Posted a sample below.
>>
>>>
>>> [declarations]
>>> const struct actlr_variant *actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
>>> int i;
>>>
>>> [rest of the functions]
>>>
>>> if (!actlrvar)
>>> return 0;
>>> > for (i = 0; i < actrlvar->num_actrlcfgs; i++) {
>>> if (actlrvar[i].io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
>>> qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx, actlrvar->actlrcfg);
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> }
>>> > Saving both on .TEXT size and indentation levels :)
>>>
>> Thanks for this suggestion Konrad, will try to implement this, as it
>> would reduce the indent levels to good extent.
>> Would something like this be okay?
>>
>> static int qcom_smmu_init_context(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain,
>> struct qcom_smmu *qsmmu = to_qcom_smmu(smmu);
>> const struct actlr_variant *actlrvar;
>> int cbndx = smmu_domain->cfg.cbndx;
>> + int i;
>>
>> + actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
>> +
>> + if (!actlrvar)
>> + goto end;
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < qsmmu->data->num_smmu ; i++) {
>> + if (actlrvar[i].io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
>> + qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx,
>> + actlrvar[i].actlrcfg);
>> + break;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +end:
>> smmu_domain->cfg.flush_walk_prefer_tlbiasid = true;
>
> If you move this assignment before the actlrvar checking (there's no
> dependency between them), you will get rid of the goto.
>
Ack thanks, it's tlb flush operation so won't be an issue moving this
before the check.
> I also noticed that qcom_smmu_match_data.actlrvar could likely be
> const struct actlr_variant * const (const pointer to a const
> resource), similarly for actlr_variant.actlrcfg
>
Sure, make sense, as we aren't aiming to modify these values later on.
Would address all these inputs in next version.
Thanks & regards,
Bibek
> Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists