Message ID | cover.1730313494.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | iommufd: Add vIOMMU infrastructure (Part-2: vDEVICE) | expand |
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 at 05:36, Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com> wrote: > > Following the previous vIOMMU series, this adds another vDEVICE structure, > representing the association from an iommufd_device to an iommufd_viommu. > This gives the whole architecture a new "v" layer: > _______________________________________________________________________ > | iommufd (with vIOMMU/vDEVICE) | > | _____________ _____________ | > | | | | | | > | |----------------| vIOMMU |<---| vDEVICE |<------| | > | | | | |_____________| | | > | | ______ | | _____________ ___|____ | > | | | | | | | | | | | > | | | IOAS |<---|(HWPT_PAGING)|<---| HWPT_NESTED |<--| DEVICE | | > | | |______| |_____________| |_____________| |________| | > |______|________|______________|__________________|_______________|_____| > | | | | | > ______v_____ | ______v_____ ______v_____ ___v__ > | struct | | PFN | (paging) | | (nested) | |struct| > |iommu_device| |------>|iommu_domain|<----|iommu_domain|<----|device| > |____________| storage|____________| |____________| |______| > > This vDEVICE object is used to collect and store all vIOMMU-related device > information/attributes in a VM. As an initial series for vDEVICE, add only > the virt_id to the vDEVICE, which is a vIOMMU specific device ID in a VM: > e.g. vSID of ARM SMMUv3, vDeviceID of AMD IOMMU, and vRID of Intel VT-d to > a Context Table. This virt_id helps IOMMU drivers to link the vID to a pID > of the device against the physical IOMMU instance. This is essential for a > vIOMMU-based invalidation, where the request contains a device's vID for a > device cache flush, e.g. ATC invalidation. > > Therefore, with this vDEVICE object, support a vIOMMU-based invalidation, > by reusing IOMMUFD_CMD_HWPT_INVALIDATE for a vIOMMU object to flush cache > with a given driver data. > > As for the implementation of the series, add driver support in ARM SMMUv3 > for a real world use case. > > This series is on Github: > https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commits/iommufd_viommu_p2-v6 > (QEMU branch for testing will be provided in Jason's nesting series) Thanks Nico I tested on aarch64, functions are OK. But with some hacks https://github.com/Linaro/linux-kernel-uadk/commit/22f47d6f3a34a0867a187473bd5ba0e0ee3395d4 Thanks
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 02:35:32PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > This avoids a bigger trouble of exposing struct iommufd_device and struct > iommufd_vdevice in the public header. > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com> > --- > include/linux/iommufd.h | 8 ++++++++ > drivers/iommu/iommufd/driver.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+) Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Jason
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 02:35:31PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> > > The iommu_copy_struct_from_user_array helper can be used to copy a single > entry from a user array which might not be efficient if the array is big. > > Add a new iommu_copy_struct_from_full_user_array to copy the entire user > array at once. Update the existing iommu_copy_struct_from_user_array kdoc > accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com> > --- > include/linux/iommu.h | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Jason
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 08:59:37AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 02:28:12PM +0800, Zhangfei Gao wrote: > > > > As for the implementation of the series, add driver support in ARM SMMUv3 > > > for a real world use case. > > > > > > This series is on Github: > > > https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commits/iommufd_viommu_p2-v6 > > > (QEMU branch for testing will be provided in Jason's nesting series) > > > > Thanks Nico > > > > I tested on aarch64, functions are OK. > > > > But with some hacks > > https://github.com/Linaro/linux-kernel-uadk/commit/22f47d6f3a34a0867a187473bd5ba0e0ee3395d4 > > Hmm, it seems like we should permit IOMMU_HWPT_FAULT_ID_VALID domain > creation on ARM? +1, since we proved PRI could work :) Thanks Nicolin
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 09:56:37AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 10:29:41AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 02:35:27PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > > > +void iommufd_vdevice_destroy(struct iommufd_object *obj) > > > +{ > > > + struct iommufd_vdevice *vdev = > > > + container_of(obj, struct iommufd_vdevice, obj); > > > + struct iommufd_viommu *viommu = vdev->viommu; > > > + > > > + /* xa_cmpxchg is okay to fail if alloc returned -EEXIST previously */ > > > + xa_cmpxchg(&viommu->vdevs, vdev->id, vdev, NULL, GFP_KERNEL); > > > > There are crazy races that would cause this not to work. Another > > thread could have successfully destroyed whatever caused EEXIST and > > the successfully registered this same vdev to the same id. Then this > > will wrongly erase the other threads entry. > > > > It would be better to skip the erase directly if the EEXIST unwind is > > being taken. > > Hmm, is the "another thread" an alloc() or a destroy()? I was thinking both > It doesn't seem to me that there could be another destroy() on the > same object since this current destroy() is the abort to an > unfinalized object. And it doesn't seem that another alloc() will > get the same vdev ptr since every vdev allocation in the alloc() > will be different? Ah so you are saying that since the vdev 'old' is local to this thread it can't possibly by aliased by another? I was worried the id could be aliased, but yes, that seems right that the vdev cmpxchg would reject that. So lets leave it Jason