From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> To: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com> Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>, Moritz Fischer <moritzf@google.com>, Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>, Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>, patches@lists.linux.dev, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry() Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 10:29:54 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20240422132954.GB49823@nvidia.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <ZiLdB6nVg9S65Q1G@google.com> On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 09:07:19PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > > - cdptr = arm_smmu_get_cd_ptr(master, ssid); > > - if (!cdptr) > > + cd_table_entry = arm_smmu_get_cd_ptr(master, ssid); > > + if (!cd_table_entry) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > + target = *cd_table_entry; > > As this changes the logic where all CD manipulation is not on the actual > CD, I believe a comment would be helpful here. This is all deleted in a few patches, doesn't seem worth it to me. These steps exist only for bisection. > > @@ -1299,18 +1357,14 @@ int arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc(struct arm_smmu_master *master, int ssid, > > if (cd_table->stall_enabled) > > val |= CTXDESC_CD_0_S; > > } > > - > > + cdptr->data[0] = cpu_to_le64(val); > > /* > > - * The SMMU accesses 64-bit values atomically. See IHI0070Ca 3.21.3 > > - * "Configuration structures and configuration invalidation completion" > > - * > > - * The size of single-copy atomic reads made by the SMMU is > > - * IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED but must be at least 64 bits. Any single > > - * field within an aligned 64-bit span of a structure can be altered > > - * without first making the structure invalid. > > + * Since the above is updating the CD entry based on the current value > > + * without zeroing unused bits it needs fixing before being passed to > > + * the programming logic. > > */ > > - WRITE_ONCE(cdptr->data[0], cpu_to_le64(val)); > > - arm_smmu_sync_cd(master, ssid, true); > > + arm_smmu_clean_cd_entry(&target); > > I am not sure I understand the logic here, is that only needed for entry[0] > As I see the other entries are set and not reused. I'm not sure what you are asking? The issue is the old logic constructs the new CD by manipulating the existing CD in various ways "in place" that ends up creating CDs that don't meet the requirements for the new programmer. For instance EPD0 will be set and the TTB0 will also be left programmed. > If so, I think it’d be better to make that clear, also as used_bits > are always 0xff for all cases, I believe the EPD0 logic should be > integrated in populating the CD so it is correct by construction, as > this looks like a hack to me. Yes, this is what happens, in a few more steps. We have to go and build the missing make functions first. There is a bit of a circular problem here: the new scheme expects that the CD is only programmed by the new scheme and follows the rules - eg no unused bits set. While the old scheme doesn't follow the rules. So this patch makes the old scheme follow the rules and be compatible with the new scheme then we go place by place and convert to the new scheme. Then we remove the old scheme entirely. Look at the "Move the CD generation for SVA into a function" patch. Yes, this is a minimal hack to let the next few patches work out correctly without breaking bisection. How about a new commit message: iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry() CD table entries and STE's have the same essential programming sequence, just with different types. Use the new ops indirection to link CD programming to the common writer. In a few more patches all CD writers will call an appropriate make function and then directly call arm_smmu_write_cd_entry(). arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc() will be removed. Until then lightly tweak arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc() to also use the new programmer by using the same logic as right now to build the target CD on the stack, sanitizing it to meet the used rules, and then using the writer. This is necessary because the writer expects that the currently programmed CD follows the used rules. Next patches add new make functions and new direct calls to arm_smmu_write_cd_entry() which will require this. Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> To: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com> Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>, Moritz Fischer <moritzf@google.com>, Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>, Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>, patches@lists.linux.dev, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry() Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 10:29:54 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20240422132954.GB49823@nvidia.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <ZiLdB6nVg9S65Q1G@google.com> On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 09:07:19PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > > - cdptr = arm_smmu_get_cd_ptr(master, ssid); > > - if (!cdptr) > > + cd_table_entry = arm_smmu_get_cd_ptr(master, ssid); > > + if (!cd_table_entry) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > + target = *cd_table_entry; > > As this changes the logic where all CD manipulation is not on the actual > CD, I believe a comment would be helpful here. This is all deleted in a few patches, doesn't seem worth it to me. These steps exist only for bisection. > > @@ -1299,18 +1357,14 @@ int arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc(struct arm_smmu_master *master, int ssid, > > if (cd_table->stall_enabled) > > val |= CTXDESC_CD_0_S; > > } > > - > > + cdptr->data[0] = cpu_to_le64(val); > > /* > > - * The SMMU accesses 64-bit values atomically. See IHI0070Ca 3.21.3 > > - * "Configuration structures and configuration invalidation completion" > > - * > > - * The size of single-copy atomic reads made by the SMMU is > > - * IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED but must be at least 64 bits. Any single > > - * field within an aligned 64-bit span of a structure can be altered > > - * without first making the structure invalid. > > + * Since the above is updating the CD entry based on the current value > > + * without zeroing unused bits it needs fixing before being passed to > > + * the programming logic. > > */ > > - WRITE_ONCE(cdptr->data[0], cpu_to_le64(val)); > > - arm_smmu_sync_cd(master, ssid, true); > > + arm_smmu_clean_cd_entry(&target); > > I am not sure I understand the logic here, is that only needed for entry[0] > As I see the other entries are set and not reused. I'm not sure what you are asking? The issue is the old logic constructs the new CD by manipulating the existing CD in various ways "in place" that ends up creating CDs that don't meet the requirements for the new programmer. For instance EPD0 will be set and the TTB0 will also be left programmed. > If so, I think it’d be better to make that clear, also as used_bits > are always 0xff for all cases, I believe the EPD0 logic should be > integrated in populating the CD so it is correct by construction, as > this looks like a hack to me. Yes, this is what happens, in a few more steps. We have to go and build the missing make functions first. There is a bit of a circular problem here: the new scheme expects that the CD is only programmed by the new scheme and follows the rules - eg no unused bits set. While the old scheme doesn't follow the rules. So this patch makes the old scheme follow the rules and be compatible with the new scheme then we go place by place and convert to the new scheme. Then we remove the old scheme entirely. Look at the "Move the CD generation for SVA into a function" patch. Yes, this is a minimal hack to let the next few patches work out correctly without breaking bisection. How about a new commit message: iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry() CD table entries and STE's have the same essential programming sequence, just with different types. Use the new ops indirection to link CD programming to the common writer. In a few more patches all CD writers will call an appropriate make function and then directly call arm_smmu_write_cd_entry(). arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc() will be removed. Until then lightly tweak arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc() to also use the new programmer by using the same logic as right now to build the target CD on the stack, sanitizing it to meet the used rules, and then using the writer. This is necessary because the writer expects that the currently programmed CD follows the used rules. Next patches add new make functions and new direct calls to arm_smmu_write_cd_entry() which will require this. Jason _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-22 13:29 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-04-16 19:28 [PATCH v7 0/9] Make the SMMUv3 CD logic match the new STE design (part 2a/3) Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 1/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add an ops indirection to the STE code Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 20:18 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-16 20:18 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-19 21:02 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-19 21:02 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-22 13:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-22 13:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry() Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 20:48 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-16 20:48 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-18 13:01 ` Robin Murphy 2024-04-18 13:01 ` Robin Murphy 2024-04-18 16:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-18 16:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-19 21:07 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-19 21:07 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-22 13:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message] 2024-04-22 13:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-27 22:08 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-27 22:08 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-29 14:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-29 14:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-29 15:30 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-29 15:30 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 3/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move the CD generation for S1 domains into a function Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 21:22 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-16 21:22 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-19 21:10 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-19 21:10 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-22 13:52 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-22 13:52 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 4/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Consolidate clearing a CD table entry Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 5/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make arm_smmu_alloc_cd_ptr() Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 22:19 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-16 22:19 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-19 21:14 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-19 21:14 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-22 14:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-22 14:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-27 22:19 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-27 22:19 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-29 14:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-29 14:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-29 14:47 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-29 14:47 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-29 14:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-29 14:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 6/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Allocate the CD table entry in advance Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 7/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move the CD generation for SVA into a function Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 7:37 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 7:37 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 13:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 13:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 16:25 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 16:25 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 16:26 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 16:26 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-18 4:40 ` Michael Shavit 2024-04-18 4:40 ` Michael Shavit 2024-04-18 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-18 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 8/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Build the whole CD in arm_smmu_make_s1_cd() Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 7:43 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 7:43 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-16 19:28 ` [PATCH v7 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-16 19:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 8:09 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 8:09 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 14:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 14:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-17 16:13 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-17 16:13 ` Nicolin Chen 2024-04-18 4:39 ` Michael Shavit 2024-04-18 4:39 ` Michael Shavit 2024-04-18 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-18 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-18 14:34 ` Michael Shavit 2024-04-18 14:34 ` Michael Shavit 2024-04-19 21:24 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-19 21:24 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-22 14:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-22 14:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-04-27 22:33 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-27 22:33 ` Mostafa Saleh 2024-04-16 19:40 ` [PATCH v7 0/9] Make the SMMUv3 CD logic match the new STE design (part 2a/3) Nicolin Chen 2024-04-16 19:40 ` Nicolin Chen
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=20240422132954.GB49823@nvidia.com \ --to=jgg@nvidia.com \ --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \ --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \ --cc=joro@8bytes.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=mdf@kernel.org \ --cc=moritzf@google.com \ --cc=mshavit@google.com \ --cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \ --cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \ --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \ --cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \ --cc=smostafa@google.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: 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.