lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Mar]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC v2 02/11] iommu: Add iommu_group_singleton_lockdown()
Hi Kevin,

On 2022/3/29 16:42, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 1:38 PM
>>
>> Some of the interfaces in the IOMMU core require that only a single
>> kernel device driver controls the device in the IOMMU group. The
>> existing method is to check the device count in the IOMMU group in
>> the interfaces. This is unreliable because any device added to the
>> IOMMU group later breaks this assumption without notifying the driver
>> using the interface. This adds iommu_group_singleton_lockdown() that
>> checks the requirement and locks down the IOMMU group with only single
>> device driver bound.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> index 0c42ece25854..9fb8a5b4491e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ struct iommu_group {
>> struct list_head entry;
>> unsigned int owner_cnt;
>> void *owner;
>> + bool singleton_lockdown;
>> };
>>
>> struct group_device {
>> @@ -968,15 +969,16 @@ void iommu_group_remove_device(struct device
>> *dev)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_group_remove_device);
>>
>> -static int iommu_group_device_count(struct iommu_group *group)
>> +/* Callers should hold the group->mutex. */
>> +static bool iommu_group_singleton_lockdown(struct iommu_group *group)
>> {
>> - struct group_device *entry;
>> - int ret = 0;
>> -
>> - list_for_each_entry(entry, &group->devices, list)
>> - ret++;
>> + if (group->owner_cnt != 1 ||
>> + group->domain != group->default_domain ||
>> + group->owner)
>> + return false;
>
> Curious why there will be a case where group uses default_domain
> while still having a owner? I have the impression that owner is used
> for userspace DMA where a different domain is used.

You are right. The default domain is automatically detached when a user
is claimed. As long as a user is claimed, the group could only use an
empty or user-specified domain.

>
>> + group->singleton_lockdown = true;
>>
>> - return ret;
>> + return true;
>> }
>
> btw I'm not sure whether this is what SVA requires. IIRC the problem with
> SVA is because PASID TLP prefix is not counted in PCI packet routing thus
> a DMA target address with PASID might be treated as P2P if the address
> falls into the MMIO BAR of other devices in the group. This is why the
> original code needs to strictly apply SVA in a group containing a single
> device, instead of a group attached by a single driver, unless we want to
> reserve those MMIO ranges in CPU VA space.

You are right. But I don't think the IOMMU core is able to guarantee
above in a platform/device-agnostic way. Or any suggestions?

I guess this should be somewhat off-loaded to the device driver which
knows details of the device. The device driver should know this and
guarantee it before calling
iommu_dev_enable_feature(dev, IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_SVA).

This patch itself just replaces the existing
"iommu_group_device_count(group) != 1" logic with a new one based on the
group ownership logistics. The former is obviously not friendly to
device hot joined afterward.

>
> Jean can correct me if my memory is wrong.
>
> Thanks
> Kevin

Best regards,
baolu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-03-30 07:00    [W:0.164 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site