[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8e17f1ac-0178-454b-b9dc-bb14ad6c465b@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:25:19 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Ashish Mhetre <amhetre@...dia.com>, Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"moderated list:ARM SMMU DRIVERS" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "iommu/io-pgtable-arm: Optimise non-coherent
unmap"
On 06/09/2024 11:56 am, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 05:27:28PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 05/09/2024 4:53 pm, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 05:49:56AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
>>>> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
>>>>
>>>> This reverts commit 85b715a334583488ad7fbd3001fe6fd617b7d4c0.
>>>>
>>>> It was causing gpu smmu faults on x1e80100.
>>>>
>>>> I _think_ what is causing this is the change in ordering of
>>>> __arm_lpae_clear_pte() (dma_sync_single_for_device() on the pgtable
>>>> memory) and io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk(). I'm not entirely sure how
>>>> this patch is supposed to work correctly in the face of other
>>>> concurrent translations (to buffers unrelated to the one being
>>>> unmapped(), because after the io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk() we can have
>>>> stale data read back into the tlb.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c | 31 ++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> Please can you try the diff below, instead?
>>
>> Given that the GPU driver's .tlb_add_page is a no-op, I can't see this
>> making a difference. In fact, given that msm_iommu_pagetable_unmap() still
>> does a brute-force iommu_flush_iotlb_all() after io-pgtable returns, and in
>> fact only recently made .tlb_flush_walk start doing anything either for the
>> sake of the map path, I'm now really wondering how this patch has had any
>> effect at all... :/
>
> Hmm, yup. Looks like Rob has come back to say the problem lies elsewhere
> anyway.
>
> One thing below though...
>
>>>
>>> Will
>>>
>>> --->8
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
>>> index 0e67f1721a3d..0a32e9499e2c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
>>> @@ -672,7 +672,7 @@ static size_t __arm_lpae_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
>>> /* Clear the remaining entries */
>>> __arm_lpae_clear_pte(ptep, &iop->cfg, i);
>>> - if (gather && !iommu_iotlb_gather_queued(gather))
>>> + if (!iommu_iotlb_gather_queued(gather))
>>
>> Note that this would reintroduce the latent issue which was present
>> originally, wherein iommu_iotlb_gather_queued(NULL) is false, but if we
>> actually allow a NULL gather to be passed to io_pgtable_tlb_add_page() it
>> may end up being dereferenced (e.g. in arm-smmu-v3).
>
> I think there is still something to fix here. arm_lpae_init_pte() can
> pass a NULL gather to __arm_lpae_unmap() and I don't think skipping the
> invalidation is correct in that case. Either the drivers need to handle
> that or we shouldn't be passing NULL.
>
> What do you think?
The subtlety there is that in that case it's always a non-leaf PTE, so
all that goes back to the driver is io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk() and the
gather is never used.
Thanks,
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists