From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> To: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> Cc: Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>, Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@intel.com>, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Subject: [PATCH v3 3/4] iommu/vt-d: Remove domain_update_iommu_snooping() Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 13:27:26 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220506052727.1689687-4-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20220506052727.1689687-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> The IOMMU force snooping capability is not required to be consistent among all the IOMMUs anymore. Remove force snooping capability check in the IOMMU hot-add path and domain_update_iommu_snooping() becomes a dead code now. Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> --- drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 34 +--------------------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 33 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c index 048ebfbd5fcb..444d51a18c93 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c @@ -533,33 +533,6 @@ static void domain_update_iommu_coherency(struct dmar_domain *domain) rcu_read_unlock(); } -static bool domain_update_iommu_snooping(struct intel_iommu *skip) -{ - struct dmar_drhd_unit *drhd; - struct intel_iommu *iommu; - bool ret = true; - - rcu_read_lock(); - for_each_active_iommu(iommu, drhd) { - if (iommu != skip) { - /* - * If the hardware is operating in the scalable mode, - * the snooping control is always supported since we - * always set PASID-table-entry.PGSNP bit if the domain - * is managed outside (UNMANAGED). - */ - if (!sm_supported(iommu) && - !ecap_sc_support(iommu->ecap)) { - ret = false; - break; - } - } - } - rcu_read_unlock(); - - return ret; -} - static int domain_update_iommu_superpage(struct dmar_domain *domain, struct intel_iommu *skip) { @@ -3606,12 +3579,7 @@ static int intel_iommu_add(struct dmar_drhd_unit *dmaru) iommu->name); return -ENXIO; } - if (!ecap_sc_support(iommu->ecap) && - domain_update_iommu_snooping(iommu)) { - pr_warn("%s: Doesn't support snooping.\n", - iommu->name); - return -ENXIO; - } + sp = domain_update_iommu_superpage(NULL, iommu) - 1; if (sp >= 0 && !(cap_super_page_val(iommu->cap) & (1 << sp))) { pr_warn("%s: Doesn't support large page.\n", -- 2.25.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> To: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v3 3/4] iommu/vt-d: Remove domain_update_iommu_snooping() Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 13:27:26 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220506052727.1689687-4-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20220506052727.1689687-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> The IOMMU force snooping capability is not required to be consistent among all the IOMMUs anymore. Remove force snooping capability check in the IOMMU hot-add path and domain_update_iommu_snooping() becomes a dead code now. Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com> --- drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 34 +--------------------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 33 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c index 048ebfbd5fcb..444d51a18c93 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c @@ -533,33 +533,6 @@ static void domain_update_iommu_coherency(struct dmar_domain *domain) rcu_read_unlock(); } -static bool domain_update_iommu_snooping(struct intel_iommu *skip) -{ - struct dmar_drhd_unit *drhd; - struct intel_iommu *iommu; - bool ret = true; - - rcu_read_lock(); - for_each_active_iommu(iommu, drhd) { - if (iommu != skip) { - /* - * If the hardware is operating in the scalable mode, - * the snooping control is always supported since we - * always set PASID-table-entry.PGSNP bit if the domain - * is managed outside (UNMANAGED). - */ - if (!sm_supported(iommu) && - !ecap_sc_support(iommu->ecap)) { - ret = false; - break; - } - } - } - rcu_read_unlock(); - - return ret; -} - static int domain_update_iommu_superpage(struct dmar_domain *domain, struct intel_iommu *skip) { @@ -3606,12 +3579,7 @@ static int intel_iommu_add(struct dmar_drhd_unit *dmaru) iommu->name); return -ENXIO; } - if (!ecap_sc_support(iommu->ecap) && - domain_update_iommu_snooping(iommu)) { - pr_warn("%s: Doesn't support snooping.\n", - iommu->name); - return -ENXIO; - } + sp = domain_update_iommu_superpage(NULL, iommu) - 1; if (sp >= 0 && !(cap_super_page_val(iommu->cap) & (1 << sp))) { pr_warn("%s: Doesn't support large page.\n", -- 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-06 5:30 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-05-06 5:27 [PATCH v3 0/4] iommu/vt-d: Force snooping improvement Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] iommu/vt-d: Block force-snoop domain attaching if no SC support Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] iommu/vt-d: Check domain force_snooping against attached devices Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 6:10 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-06 6:10 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-06 7:41 ` Baolu Lu 2022-05-06 7:41 ` Baolu Lu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` Lu Baolu [this message] 2022-05-06 5:27 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] iommu/vt-d: Remove domain_update_iommu_snooping() Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] iommu/vt-d: Remove hard coding PGSNP bit in PASID entries Lu Baolu 2022-05-06 5:27 ` Lu Baolu
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=20220506052727.1689687-4-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \ --to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \ --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \ --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \ --cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \ --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \ --cc=joro@8bytes.org \ --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.