[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240607193055.GA855605@bhelgaas>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:30:55 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Gal Shalom <galshalom@...dia.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Masoud Moshref Javadi <mmoshrefjava@...dia.com>,
Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@...dia.com>,
Vikram Sethi <vsethi@...dia.com>,
Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@...dia.com>,
Jiandi An <jan@...dia.com>, Tushar Dave <tdave@...dia.com>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Krishna Thota <kthota@...dia.com>,
Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy@...dia.com>,
"sagar.tv@...il.com" <sagar.tv@...il.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] PCI: Extend ACS configurability
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 07:50:59AM +0000, Vidya Sagar wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
> Could you let me know if Jason's reply answers your question?
> Please let me know if you are looking for any more information.
I think we should add some of that content to the commit log. It
needs:
- Subject line that advertises some good thing.
- A description of why users want this. I have no idea what the
actual benefit is, but I'm looking for something at the level of
"The default ACS settings put A and B in different IOMMU groups,
preventing P2PDMA between them. If we disable ACS X, A and B will
be put in the same group and P2PDMA will work".
- A primer on how users can affect IOMMU groups by enabling/
disabling ACS settings so they can use this without just blind
trial and error. A note that this is immutable except at boot
time.
- A pointer to the code that determines IOMMU groups based on the
ACS settings. Similar to the above, but more useful for
developers.
If we assert "for iommu_groups to form correctly ...", a hint about
why/where this is so would be helpful.
"Correctly" is not quite the right word here; it's just a fact that
the ACS settings determined at boot time result in certain IOMMU
groups. If the user desires different groups, it's not that something
is "incorrect"; it's just that the user may have to accept less
isolation to get the desired IOMMU groups.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> > ...
> >
> > On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 09:59:36AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > [+cc iommu folks]
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 12:05:28PM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote:
> > > > For iommu_groups to form correctly, the ACS settings in the PCIe
> > > > fabric need to be setup early in the boot process, either via the
> > > > BIOS or via the kernel disable_acs_redir parameter.
> > >
> > > Can you point to the iommu code that is involved here? It sounds like
> > > the iommu_groups are built at boot time and are immutable after that?
> >
> > They are created when the struct device is plugged in. pci_device_group() does the
> > logic.
> >
> > Notably groups can't/don't change if details like ACS change after the groups are
> > setup.
> >
> > There are alot of instructions out there telling people to boot their servers and then
> > manually change the ACS flags with set_pci or something, and these are not good
> > instructions since it defeats the VFIO group based security mechanisms.
> >
> > > If we need per-device ACS config that depends on the workload, it
> > > seems kind of problematic to only be able to specify this at boot
> > > time. I guess we would need to reboot if we want to run a workload
> > > that needs a different config?
> >
> > Basically. The main difference I'd see is if the server is a VM host or running bare
> > metal apps. You can get more efficicenty if you change things for the bare metal case,
> > and often bare metal will want to turn the iommu off while a VM host often wants
> > more of it turned on.
> >
> > > Is this the iommu usage model we want in the long term?
> >
> > There is some path to more dynamic behavior here, but it would require separating
> > groups into two components - devices that are together because they are physically
> > sharing translation (aliases and things) from devices that are together because they
> > share a security boundary (ACS).
> >
> > It is more believable we could dynamically change security group assigments for VFIO
> > than translation group assignment. I don't know anyone interested in this right now -
> > Alex and I have only talked about it as a possibility a while back.
> >
> > FWIW I don't view patch as excluding more dynamisism in the future, but it is the best
> > way to work with the current state of affairs, and definitely better than set_pci
> > instructions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists