linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] iommu: Permit modular builds of ARM SMMU[v3] drivers
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 16:34:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGETcx-MuMVvj0O-MFdfmLADEq=cQY_=x+irvhgwHhG4VeeSdg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191031193758.GA2607492@lophozonia>

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 12:38 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker
<jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Saravana, Will,
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 05:57:44PM -0700, Saravana Kannan via iommu wrote:
> > > > > Obviously you need to be careful about using IOMMU drivers as modules,
> > > > > since late loading of the driver for an IOMMU serving active DMA masters
> > > > > is going to end badly in many cases. On Android, we're using device links
> > > > > to ensure that the IOMMU probes first.
> > > >
> > > > Out of curiosity, which device links are those? Clearly not the RPM links
> > > > created by the IOMMU drivers themselves... Is this some special Android
> > > > magic, or is there actually a chance of replacing all the
> > > > of_iommu_configure() machinery with something more generic?
> > >
> > > I'll admit that I haven't used them personally yet, but I'm referring to
> > > this series from Saravana [CC'd]:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20190904211126.47518-1-saravanak@google.com/
> > >
> > > which is currently sitting in linux-next now that we're upstreaming the
> > > "special Android magic" ;)
>
> Neat, I'm trying to do the same for virtio-iommu. It needs to be modular
> because it depends on the virtio transport, which distributions usually
> build as a module. So far I've been managing the device links in
> virtio-iommu's add_device() and remove_device() callbacks [1]. Since it
> relies on the existing probe deferral, I had to make a special case for
> virtio-iommu to avoid giving up after initcalls_done [2].
>
> Currently buggy, it explodes on the second modprobe.
>
> [1] http://jpbrucker.net/git/linux/commit/?h=virtio-iommu/module-2019-10-31&id=f72978be18cb52eaa2d46dc762711bacbfab5039
> [2] http://jpbrucker.net/git/linux/commit/?h=virtio-iommu/module-2019-10-31&id=f5fe188bb7fde33422ef08b9aad956dc3c77ec39
>
> [...]
> > Wrt IOMMUs, the only missing piece in upstream is a trivial change
> > that does something like this in drivers/of/property.c
> >
> > +static struct device_node *parse_iommus(struct device_node *np,
> > +                                        const char *prop_name, int index)
> > +{
> > +        return parse_prop_cells(np, prop_name, index, "iommus",
> > +                                "#iommu-cells");
> > +}
>
> The 'iommus' property only applies to platform devices,

An early version of this patch series was limited to platform device,
but that's not true with the version that Will pointed to and was
merged into driver-core-next. The iommu parsing and creating device
links applies to all devices that use DT. That's why this code is in
of/property.c opposed to of/platform.c.

> do you have any
> plan for PCI?  PCI devices generally don't have a DT node. Only their root
> bridge has a node, with an 'iommu-map' property instead of 'iommus', so
> I don't think add_links() would get called for them.

I looked into the iommu-map property and it shouldn't be too hard to
add support for it. Looks like we can simply hold off on probing the
root bridge device till all the iommus in its iommu-map are probed and
we should be fine.

> I'm also unsure about distro vendors agreeing to a mandatory kernel
> parameter (of_devlink). Do you plan to eventually enable it by default?
>
> > static const struct supplier_bindings of_supplier_bindings[] = {
> >         { .parse_prop = parse_clocks, },
> >         { .parse_prop = parse_interconnects, },
> >         { .parse_prop = parse_regulators, },
> > +        { .parse_prop = parse_iommus, },
> >         {},
> > };
> >
> > I plan to upstream this pretty soon, but I have other patches in
> > flight that touch the same file and I'm waiting for those to get
> > accepted. I also want to clean up the code a bit to reduce some
> > repetition before I add support for more bindings.
>
> I'm also wondering about ACPI support.

I'd love to add ACPI support too, but I have zero knowledge of ACPI.
I'd be happy to help anyone who wants to add ACPI support that allows
ACPI to add device links.

> IOMMU already has a sort of
> canonical code path that links endpoints to their IOMMU
> (iommu_probe_device()), after the firmware descriptions have been parsed.
> So if we created the device links in the iommu core, for example
> iommu_bus_notifier(), we would support all firmware interface flavors.
> Otherwise we'll have to create those device links in the IORT driver as
> well (plus DMAR and IVRS if they want it).

IOMMU driver/framework or whoever else can create device links as
necessary. That's not mutually exclusive to the firmware adding device
links (the device links APIs handle this nicely). While device probe
ordering is one benefit of my patch series, that's not all of it
though. It also deals with making sure suppliers known when they can
clean up the boot state of their device even when the drivers for all
their consumers are loaded as modules (so late initcall won't work). I
can go into more details on this if needed, but that latter part is
not very relevant in this context and you can find most of the details
in my patch series/documentation I added.

Thanks,
Saravana

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-31 23:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-30 14:51 [PATCH 0/7] iommu: Permit modular builds of ARM SMMU[v3] drivers Will Deacon
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 1/7] drivers/iommu: Export core IOMMU API symbols to permit modular drivers Will Deacon
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 2/7] iommu/of: Request ACS from the PCI core when configuring IOMMU linkage Will Deacon
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 3/7] PCI: Export pci_ats_disabled() as a GPL symbol to modules Will Deacon
2019-10-30 20:30   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 4/7] Revert "iommu/arm-smmu: Make arm-smmu-v3 explicitly non-modular" Will Deacon
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 5/7] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Allow building as a module Will Deacon
2019-10-30 19:31   ` Joerg Roedel
2019-10-31 15:42     ` Will Deacon
2019-11-04 19:15       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-11-08 14:54         ` Will Deacon
2019-11-05 12:15       ` Joerg Roedel
2019-11-08 11:03         ` Will Deacon
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 6/7] Revert "iommu/arm-smmu: Make arm-smmu explicitly non-modular" Will Deacon
2019-10-30 23:09   ` Jordan Crouse
2019-10-31 12:03     ` Will Deacon
2019-10-31 15:32       ` Jordan Crouse
2019-10-30 14:51 ` [PATCH 7/7] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow building as a module Will Deacon
2019-10-30 15:22   ` Rob Herring
2019-10-30 15:26     ` Will Deacon
2019-10-30 15:33     ` Robin Murphy
2019-11-04 19:34   ` Isaac J. Manjarres
2019-11-07 12:48     ` Will Deacon
2019-10-30 15:35 ` [PATCH 0/7] iommu: Permit modular builds of ARM SMMU[v3] drivers Robin Murphy
2019-10-30 15:54   ` Will Deacon
2019-10-31  0:57     ` Saravana Kannan
2019-10-31 19:37       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-10-31 23:34         ` Saravana Kannan [this message]
2019-11-01 10:27           ` John Garry
2019-11-01 21:13             ` Saravana Kannan
2019-11-04 12:16               ` John Garry
2019-11-04 13:29                 ` Robin Murphy
2019-11-07  6:11                   ` Saravana Kannan
2019-11-07  9:13                     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-11-07  6:02                 ` Saravana Kannan
2019-11-01 11:41           ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-11-01 12:28             ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-11-01 21:26               ` Saravana Kannan
2019-11-04 11:43                 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-11-07  5:55                   ` Saravana Kannan
2019-11-01 17:21         ` Will Deacon
2019-11-04  7:54           ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-11-07  6:16       ` Saravana Kannan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAGETcx-MuMVvj0O-MFdfmLADEq=cQY_=x+irvhgwHhG4VeeSdg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=saravanak@google.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).