lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: arm64 iommu groups issue
From
Date
On 12/06/2020 15:30, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 12:08:48PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Right, and even worse is that it relies on the port driver even
>>>> existing at all.
>>>>
>>>> All this iommu group assignment should be taken outside device
>>>> driver probe paths.
>>>>
>>>> However we could still consider device links for sync'ing the SMMU
>>>> and each device probing.
>>>
>>> Yes, we should get that for DT now thanks to the of_devlink stuff, but
>>> cooking up some equivalent for IORT might be worthwhile.
>>
>> It doesn't solve this problem, but at least we could remove the iommu_ops
>> check in iort_iommu_xlate().
>>
>> We would need to carve out a path from pci_device_add() or even device_add()
>> to solve all cases.
>>
>>>
>>>>> Another thought that crosses my mind is that when pci_device_group()
>>>>> walks up to the point of ACS isolation and doesn't find an existing
>>>>> group, it can still infer that everything it walked past *should* be put
>>>>> in the same group it's then eventually going to return. Unfortunately I
>>>>> can't see an obvious way for it to act on that knowledge, though, since
>>>>> recursive iommu_probe_device() is unlikely to end well.
>>>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> And this looks to be the reason for which current
>>>> iommu_bus_init()->bus_for_each_device(..., add_iommu_group) fails
>>>> also.
>>>
>>> Of course, just adding a 'correct' add_device replay without the
>>> of_xlate process doesn't help at all. No wonder this looked suspiciously
>>> simpler than where the first idea left off...
>>>
>>> (on reflection, the core of this idea seems to be recycling the existing
>>> iommu_bus_init walk rather than building up a separate "waiting list",
>>> while forgetting that that wasn't the difficult part of the original
>>> idea anyway)
>>
>> We could still use a bus walk to add the group per iommu, but we would need
>> an additional check to ensure the device is associated with the IOMMU.
>>
>>>
>>>> On this current code mentioned, the principle of this seems wrong to
>>>> me - we call bus_for_each_device(..., add_iommu_group) for the first
>>>> SMMU in the system which probes, but we attempt to add_iommu_group()
>>>> for all devices on the bus, even though the SMMU for that device may
>>>> yet to have probed.
>>>
>>> Yes, iommu_bus_init() is one of the places still holding a
>>> deeply-ingrained assumption that the ops go live for all IOMMU instances
>>> at once, which is what warranted the further replay in
>>> of_iommu_configure() originally. Moving that out of
>>> of_platform_device_create() to support probe deferral is where the
>>> trouble really started.
>>
>> I'm not too familiar with the history here, but could this be reverted now
>> with the introduction of of_devlink stuff?
>
> Hi John,

Hi Lorenzo,

>
> have we managed to reach a consensus on this thread on how to solve
> the issue ?

No, not really. So Robin and I tried a couple of quick things
previously, but they came did not come to much, as above.

> Asking because this thread seems stalled - I am keen on
> getting it fixed.

I haven't spent more time on this. But from what I was hearing last
time, this issue was ticketed internally for arm, so I was waiting for
that to be picked up to re-engage.

Thanks,
John

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-15 09:38    [W:0.047 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site