From: "Xu, Quan" <quan.xu@intel.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "dario.faggioli@citrix.com" <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>,
"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v11 1/3] IOMMU: add a timeout parameter for device IOTLB invalidation
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 02:55:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <945CA011AD5F084CBEA3E851C0AB28894B8E5D32@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5750259102000078000F0D75@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On June 02, 2016 6:25 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >>> On 01.06.16 at 11:05, <quan.xu@intel.com> wrote:
> > From: Quan Xu <quan.xu@intel.com>
> > v11: Change the timeout parameter from 'vtd_qi_timeout' to
> > 'iommu_dev_iotlb_timeout', which is not only for VT-d device
> > IOTLB invalidation, but also for other IOMMU implementations.
>
> This goes after the first --- separator.
>
Got it. It should be:
---
v11:
- ...
- ...
---
> > --- a/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown
> > +++ b/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown
> > @@ -996,6 +996,15 @@ debug hypervisor only).
> >
> > >> Enable IOMMU debugging code (implies `verbose`).
> >
> > +### iommu\_dev\_iotlb\_timeout
> > +> `= <integer>`
> > +
> > +> Default: `1`
>
> So on v10 I had made clear that any timeout reduction from its current value
> is, for the ATS case, not acceptable, unless you have proof that this lower
> value will fit all past, present, and future devices. Otherwise we're risking a
> regression here.
>
I really misunderstood the 'current value', which should be about 'DMAR_OPERATION_TIMEOUT MILLISECS(1000) ', instead of ' IOMMU_QI_TIMEOUT MILLISECS(1)' in my patch.
So the default is 1000.
> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/qinval.c
> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/qinval.c
> > @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@
> > #include "vtd.h"
> > #include "extern.h"
> >
> > +#define IOMMU_QI_TIMEOUT MILLISECS(1)
>
> May I suggest VTD_QI_TIMEOUT (but see also below)?
>
Agreed. VTD_QI_TIMEOUT is a better one.
> > @@ -163,14 +165,21 @@ static int queue_invalidate_wait(struct iommu
> *iommu,
> > /* Now we don't support interrupt method */
> > if ( sw )
> > {
> > + s_time_t timeout;
> > +
> > /* In case all wait descriptor writes to same addr with same data */
> > - start_time = NOW();
> > + timeout = flush_dev_iotlb ?
> > + (NOW() + iommu_dev_iotlb_timeout * MILLISECS(1)) :
>
> MILLISECS(iommu_dev_iotlb_timeout)
>
> > + (NOW() + IOMMU_QI_TIMEOUT);
>
> Or really the whole expression should probably simply become
>
> timeout = NOW() + MILLISECS(flush_dev_iotlb ?
> iommu_dev_iotlb_timeout : VTD_QI_TIMEOUT);
>
> (of course with VTD_QI_TIMEOUT having its MILLISECS() dropped, and
> suitably line wrapped).
>
I prefer this later one.
Quan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-15 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-01 9:05 [Patch v11 0/3] VT-d Device-TLB flush issue Xu, Quan
2016-06-01 9:05 ` [Patch v11 1/3] IOMMU: add a timeout parameter for device IOTLB invalidation Xu, Quan
2016-06-02 10:24 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-15 2:55 ` Xu, Quan [this message]
2016-06-01 9:05 ` [Patch v11 2/3] vt-d: synchronize for Device-TLB flush one by one Xu, Quan
2016-06-02 10:49 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-01 9:05 ` [Patch v11 3/3] vt-d: fix vt-d Device-TLB flush timeout issue Xu, Quan
2016-06-02 11:07 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-16 8:42 ` Xu, Quan
2016-06-16 9:04 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-17 6:08 ` Xu, Quan
2016-06-17 7:00 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-17 8:15 ` Xu, Quan
2016-06-17 8:40 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-22 15:54 ` Xu, Quan
2016-06-22 16:18 ` Jan Beulich
2016-06-23 2:08 ` Xu, Quan
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=945CA011AD5F084CBEA3E851C0AB28894B8E5D32@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com \
--to=quan.xu@intel.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
--cc=feng.wu@intel.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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).