lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 02/12] iommu: Add pasid_bits field in struct dev_iommu
From
On 2022/5/10 22:34, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 02:17:28PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>
>> int iommu_device_register(struct iommu_device *iommu,
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>> index 627a3ed5ee8f..afc63fce6107 100644
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>> @@ -2681,6 +2681,8 @@ static struct iommu_device *arm_smmu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
>> smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_STALL_FORCE)
>> master->stall_enabled = true;
>>
>> + dev->iommu->pasid_bits = master->ssid_bits;
>> return &smmu->iommu;
>>
>> err_free_master:
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> index 2990f80c5e08..99643f897f26 100644
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> @@ -4624,8 +4624,11 @@ static struct iommu_device *intel_iommu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
>> if (pasid_supported(iommu)) {
>> int features = pci_pasid_features(pdev);
>>
>> - if (features >= 0)
>> + if (features >= 0) {
>> info->pasid_supported = features | 1;
>> + dev->iommu->pasid_bits =
>> + fls(pci_max_pasids(pdev)) - 1;
>> + }
>
> It is not very nice that both the iommu drivers have to duplicate the
> code to read the pasid capability out of the PCI device.
>
> IMHO it would make more sense for the iommu layer to report the
> capability of its own HW block only, and for the core code to figure
> out the master's limitation using a bus-specific approach.

Fair enough. The iommu hardware capability could be reported in

/**
* struct iommu_device - IOMMU core representation of one IOMMU hardware
* instance
* @list: Used by the iommu-core to keep a list of registered iommus
* @ops: iommu-ops for talking to this iommu
* @dev: struct device for sysfs handling
*/
struct iommu_device {
struct list_head list;
const struct iommu_ops *ops;
struct fwnode_handle *fwnode;
struct device *dev;
};

I haven't checked ARM code yet, but it works for x86 as far as I can
see.

>
> It is also unfortunate that the enable/disable pasid is inside the
> iommu driver as well - ideally the PCI driver itself would do this
> when it knows it wants to use PASIDs.
>
> The ordering interaction with ATS makes this look quite annoying
> though. :(
>
> I'm also not convinced individual IOMMU drivers should be forcing ATS
> on, there are performance and functional implications here. Using ATS
> or not is possibly best left as an administrator policy controlled by
> the core code. Again we seem to have some mess.

Agreed with you. This has already been in my task list. I will start to
solve it after the iommufd tasks.

Best regards,
baolu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-05-11 04:27    [W:0.119 / U:1.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site