Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 11:26:04 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
Cc: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
 Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...nel.org>,
 Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>,
 Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
 Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt
 <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
 Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, Hanjun Guo
 <guohanjun@...wei.com>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
 "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
 Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
 Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
 Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
 Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
 Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
 "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] iommu/dma: Make limit checks self-contained

On 2024-05-18 7:31 pm, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 04:03:57PM GMT, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 17/05/2024 3:21 pm, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15/05/2024 15:59, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>> Hi Jon,
>>>>
>>>> On 2024-05-14 2:27 pm, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>>>> Hi Robin,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19/04/2024 17:54, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>>>> It's now easy to retrieve the device's DMA limits if we want to check
>>>>>> them against the domain aperture, so do that ourselves instead of
>>>>>> relying on them being passed through the callchain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
>>>>>> Tested-by: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> � drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 21 +++++++++------------
>>>>>> � 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>>>>>> index a3039005b696..f542eabaefa4 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>>>>>> @@ -660,19 +660,16 @@ static void
>>>>>> iommu_dma_init_options(struct iommu_dma_options *options,
>>>>>> � /**
>>>>>> �� * iommu_dma_init_domain - Initialise a DMA mapping domain
>>>>>> �� * @domain: IOMMU domain previously prepared by
>>>>>> iommu_get_dma_cookie()
>>>>>> - * @base: IOVA at which the mappable address space starts
>>>>>> - * @limit: Last address of the IOVA space
>>>>>> �� * @dev: Device the domain is being initialised for
>>>>>> �� *
>>>>>> - * @base and @limit + 1 should be exact multiples of IOMMU
>>>>>> page granularity to
>>>>>> - * avoid rounding surprises. If necessary, we reserve the
>>>>>> page at address 0
>>>>>> + * If the geometry and dma_range_map include address 0, we
>>>>>> reserve that page
>>>>>> �� * to ensure it is an invalid IOVA. It is safe to
>>>>>> reinitialise a domain, but
>>>>>> �� * any change which could make prior IOVAs invalid will fail.
>>>>>> �� */
>>>>>> -static int iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain
>>>>>> *domain, dma_addr_t base,
>>>>>> -���������������� dma_addr_t limit, struct device *dev)
>>>>>> +static int iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain
>>>>>> *domain, struct device *dev)
>>>>>> � {
>>>>>> ����� struct iommu_dma_cookie *cookie = domain->iova_cookie;
>>>>>> +��� const struct bus_dma_region *map = dev->dma_range_map;
>>>>>> ����� unsigned long order, base_pfn;
>>>>>> ����� struct iova_domain *iovad;
>>>>>> ����� int ret;
>>>>>> @@ -684,18 +681,18 @@ static int
>>>>>> iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain *domain,
>>>>>> dma_addr_t base,
>>>>>> ����� /* Use the smallest supported page size for IOVA granularity */
>>>>>> ����� order = __ffs(domain->pgsize_bitmap);
>>>>>> -��� base_pfn = max_t(unsigned long, 1, base >> order);
>>>>>> +��� base_pfn = 1;
>>>>>> ����� /* Check the domain allows at least some access to the
>>>>>> device... */
>>>>>> -��� if (domain->geometry.force_aperture) {
>>>>>> +��� if (map) {
>>>>>> +������� dma_addr_t base = dma_range_map_min(map);
>>>>>> ��������� if (base > domain->geometry.aperture_end ||
>>>>>> -����������� limit < domain->geometry.aperture_start) {
>>>>>> +����������� dma_range_map_max(map) <
>>>>>> domain->geometry.aperture_start) {
>>>>>> ������������� pr_warn("specified DMA range outside IOMMU
>>>>>> capability\n");
>>>>>> ������������� return -EFAULT;
>>>>>> ��������� }
>>>>>> ��������� /* ...then finally give it a kicking to make sure it fits */
>>>>>> -������� base_pfn = max_t(unsigned long, base_pfn,
>>>>>> -��������������� domain->geometry.aperture_start >> order);
>>>>>> +������� base_pfn = max(base,
>>>>>> domain->geometry.aperture_start) >> order;
>>>>>> ����� }
>>>>>> ����� /* start_pfn is always nonzero for an
>>>>>> already-initialised domain */
>>>>>> @@ -1760,7 +1757,7 @@ void iommu_setup_dma_ops(struct device
>>>>>> *dev, u64 dma_base, u64 dma_limit)
>>>>>> ������ * underlying IOMMU driver needs to support via the
>>>>>> dma-iommu layer.
>>>>>> ������ */
>>>>>> ����� if (iommu_is_dma_domain(domain)) {
>>>>>> -������� if (iommu_dma_init_domain(domain, dma_base, dma_limit, dev))
>>>>>> +������� if (iommu_dma_init_domain(domain, dev))
>>>>>> ������������� goto out_err;
>>>>>> ��������� dev->dma_ops = &iommu_dma_ops;
>>>>>> ����� }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have noticed some random test failures on Tegra186 and
>>>>> Tegra194 and bisect is pointing to this commit. Reverting this
>>>>> along with the various dependencies does fix the problem. On
>>>>> Tegra186 CPU hotplug is failing and on Tegra194 suspend is
>>>>> failing. Unfortunately, on neither platform do I see any
>>>>> particular crash but the boards hang somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> That is... thoroughly bemusing :/ Not only is there supposed to be
>>>> no real functional change here - we should merely be recalculating
>>>> the same information from dev->dma_range_map that the callers were
>>>> already doing to generate the base/limit arguments - but the act of
>>>> initially setting up a default domain for a device behind an IOMMU
>>>> should have no connection whatsoever to suspend and especially not
>>>> to CPU hotplug.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes it does look odd, but this is what bisect reported ...
>>>
>>> git bisect start
>>> # good: [a38297e3fb012ddfa7ce0321a7e5a8daeb1872b6] Linux 6.9
>>> git bisect good a38297e3fb012ddfa7ce0321a7e5a8daeb1872b6
>>> # bad: [6ba6c795dc73c22ce2c86006f17c4aa802db2a60] Add linux-next
>>> specific files for 20240513
>>> git bisect bad 6ba6c795dc73c22ce2c86006f17c4aa802db2a60
>>> # good: [29e7f949865a023a21ecdfbd82d68ac697569f34] Merge branch 'main'
>>> of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
>>> git bisect good 29e7f949865a023a21ecdfbd82d68ac697569f34
>>> # skip: [150e6cc14e51f2a07034106a4529cdaafd812c46] Merge branch 'next'
>>> of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dtor/input.git
>>> git bisect skip 150e6cc14e51f2a07034106a4529cdaafd812c46
>>> # good: [f5d75327d30af49acf2e4b55f35ce2e6c45d1287] drm/amd/display: Fix
>>> invalid Copyright notice
>>> git bisect good f5d75327d30af49acf2e4b55f35ce2e6c45d1287
>>> # skip: [f1ec9a9ffc526df7c9523006c2abbb8ea554cdd8] Merge branch
>>> 'for-next' of
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux-dt.git
>>> git bisect skip f1ec9a9ffc526df7c9523006c2abbb8ea554cdd8
>>> # bad: [f091e93306e0429ebb7589b9874590b6a9705e64] dma-mapping: Simplify
>>> arch_setup_dma_ops()
>>> git bisect bad f091e93306e0429ebb7589b9874590b6a9705e64
>>> # good: [91cfd679f9e8b9a7bf2f26adf66eff99dbe2026b] ACPI/IORT: Handle
>>> memory address size limits as limits
>>> git bisect good 91cfd679f9e8b9a7bf2f26adf66eff99dbe2026b
>>> # bad: [ad4750b07d3462ce29a0c9b1e88b2a1f9795290e] iommu/dma: Make limit
>>> checks self-contained
>>> git bisect bad ad4750b07d3462ce29a0c9b1e88b2a1f9795290e
>>> # good: [fece6530bf4b59b01a476a12851e07751e73d69f] dma-mapping: Add
>>> helpers for dma_range_map bounds
>>> git bisect good fece6530bf4b59b01a476a12851e07751e73d69f
>>> # first bad commit: [ad4750b07d3462ce29a0c9b1e88b2a1f9795290e]
>>> iommu/dma: Make limit checks self-contained
>>>
>>> There is a couple skips in there and so I will try this again.
>>>
>>>>> If you have any ideas on things we can try let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Since the symptom seems inexplicable, I'd throw the usual memory
>>>> debugging stuff like KASAN at it first. I'd also try
>>>> "no_console_suspend" to check whether any late output is being
>>>> missed in the suspend case (and if it's already broken, then any
>>>> additional issues that may be caused by the console itself hopefully
>>>> shouldn't matter).
>>>>
>>>> For more base-covering, do you have the "arm64: Properly clean up
>>>> iommu-dma remnants" fix in there already as well? That bug has
>>>> bisected to patch #6 each time though, so I do still suspect that
>>>> what you're seeing is likely something else. It does seem
>>>> potentially significant that those Tegra platforms are making fairly
>>>> wide use of dma-ranges, but there's no clear idea forming out of
>>>> that observation just yet...
>>>
>>> I was hoping it was the same issue other people had reported,
>>> but the fix provided did not help. I have also tried today's
>>> -next and I am still seeing the issue.
>>>
>>> I should have more time next week to look at this further. Let
>>> me confirm which change is causing this and add more debug.
>>
>> Thanks. From staring at the code I think I've spotted one subtlety which
>> may not be quite as intended - can you see if the diff below helps? It
>> occurs to me that suspend and CPU hotplug may not *cause* the symptom,
>> but they could certainly stall if one or more relevant CPUs is *already*
>> stuck in a loop somewhere...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin.
>>
>> ----->8-----
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>> index 89a53c2f2cf9..85eb1846c637 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
>> @@ -686,6 +686,7 @@ static int iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device *dev
>>   	/* Check the domain allows at least some access to the device... */
>>   	if (map) {
>>   		dma_addr_t base = dma_range_map_min(map);
>> +		base = max(base, (dma_addr_t)1 << order);
>>   		if (base > domain->geometry.aperture_end ||
>>   		    dma_range_map_max(map) < domain->geometry.aperture_start) {
>>   			pr_warn("specified DMA range outside IOMMU capability\n");
> 
> With this in place I no longer see the mapping fail on the nvidia system.

Cheers Jerry, that's reassuring. I'll write up a proper patch shortly - 
with Monday morning eyes I realise this isn't entirely the right fix for 
how I messed up here - and hope that my guess was right and it's the 
source of Jon's issues as well. From experience I know that the effects 
of the IOVA allocator going wrong can be varied and downright weird...

Thanks,
Robin.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists