All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
	<joro@8bytes.org>, <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	<will@kernel.org>, <robdclark@gmail.com>, <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	<baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>, <agross@kernel.org>,
	<bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>, <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
	<matthias.bgg@gmail.com>, <heiko@sntech.de>,
	<orsonzhai@gmail.com>, <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	<zhang.lyra@gmail.com>, <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	<sricharan@codeaurora.org>, <yong.wu@mediatek.com>,
	<vdumpa@nvidia.com>, <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
	<thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>, <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
	<yangyingliang@huawei.com>, <jon@solid-run.com>,
	<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
	<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] iommu: Regulate errno in ->attach_dev callback functions
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 13:55:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YyI/rLRu1qQ57LM0@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f049bb8-76e6-901a-9f8e-b48d270bc4a0@arm.com>

Hi Robin,

On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 08:53:07PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> On 2022-09-14 18:58, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:49:42AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 06:11:06AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 01:27:03PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > > > I think in the future it will be too easy to forget about the constrained
> > > > > return value of attach() while modifying some other part of the driver,
> > > > > and let an external helper return EINVAL. So I'd rather not propagate ret
> > > > > from outside of viommu_domain_attach() and finalise().
> > > > 
> > > > Fortunately, if -EINVAL is wrongly returned it only creates an
> > > > inefficiency, not a functional problem. So we do not need to be
> > > > precise here.
> > > 
> > > Ah fair. In that case the attach_dev() documentation should indicate that
> > > EINVAL is a hint, so that callers don't rely on it (currently words "must"
> > > and "exclusively" indicate that returning EINVAL for anything other than
> > > device-domain incompatibility is unacceptable). The virtio-iommu
> > > implementation may well return EINVAL from the virtio stack or from the
> > > host response.
> > 
> > How about this?
> > 
> > + * * EINVAL    - mainly, device and domain are incompatible, or something went
> > + *               wrong with the domain. It's suggested to avoid kernel prints
> > + *               along with this errno. And it's better to convert any EINVAL
> > + *               returned from kAPIs to ENODEV if it is device-specific, or to
> > + *               some other reasonable errno being listed below
> 
> FWIW, I'd say something like:
> 
> "The device and domain are incompatible. If this is due to some previous
> configuration of the domain, drivers should not log an error, since it
> is legitimate for callers to test reuse of an existing domain.
> Otherwise, it may still represent some fundamental problem."

OK. I will use this narrative.

> And then at the public interfaces state it from other angle:
> 
> "The device and domain are incompatible. If the domain has already been
> used or configured in some way, attaching the same device to a different
> domain may be expected to succeed. Otherwise, it may still represent
> some fundamental problem."

I assume this should go to kdocs of iommu_attach_device/group().

> [ and to save another mail, I'm not sure copying the default comment for
> ENOSPC is all that helpful either - what is "space" for something that
> isn't a storage device? I'd guess limited hardware resources in some
> form, but in the IOMMU context, potential confusion with address space
> is maybe a little too close for comfort? ]

How about "non-ENOMEM type of resource allocation failure"?

> > > > > Since we can't guarantee that APIs like virtio or ida won't ever return
> > > > > EINVAL, we should set all return values:
> > > > 
> > > > I dislike this alot, it squashes all return codes to try to optimize
> > > > an obscure failure path :(
> > 
> > Hmm...should I revert all the driver changes back to this version?
> 
> Yeah, I don't think we need to go too mad here. Drivers shouldn't emit
> their *own* -EINVAL unless appropriate, but if it comes back from some
> external API then that implies something's gone unexpectedly wrong
> anyway - maybe it's a transient condition and a subsequent different
> attach might actually work out OK? We can't really say in general.

OK. Then there's even no need to convert EINVAL to ENODEV.

> Besides, if the driver sees an error which implies it's done something
> wrong itself, it probably shouldn't be trusted to try to reason about it
> further. The caller can handle any error as long as we set their
> expectations correctly.

Yea. As Jason remarked, a wrongly returned EINVAL would make things
a bit inefficient: VFIO/IOMMUFD would keep trying attach_dev() with
its existing domain list and a new domain but fail all of them.

I will change things in v2 back to this 2-patch version, and maybe
limit a bit further the changes in the first NODEV patch.

Thanks!
Nic

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
	<joro@8bytes.org>, <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	<will@kernel.org>, <robdclark@gmail.com>, <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	<baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>, <agross@kernel.org>,
	<bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>, <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
	<matthias.bgg@gmail.com>, <heiko@sntech.de>,
	<orsonzhai@gmail.com>, <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	<zhang.lyra@gmail.com>, <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	<sricharan@codeaurora.org>, <yong.wu@mediatek.com>,
	<vdumpa@nvidia.com>, <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
	<thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>, <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
	<yangyingliang@huawei.com>, <jon@solid-run.com>,
	<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
	<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] iommu: Regulate errno in ->attach_dev callback functions
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 13:55:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YyI/rLRu1qQ57LM0@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f049bb8-76e6-901a-9f8e-b48d270bc4a0@arm.com>

Hi Robin,

On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 08:53:07PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> On 2022-09-14 18:58, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:49:42AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 06:11:06AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 01:27:03PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > > > I think in the future it will be too easy to forget about the constrained
> > > > > return value of attach() while modifying some other part of the driver,
> > > > > and let an external helper return EINVAL. So I'd rather not propagate ret
> > > > > from outside of viommu_domain_attach() and finalise().
> > > > 
> > > > Fortunately, if -EINVAL is wrongly returned it only creates an
> > > > inefficiency, not a functional problem. So we do not need to be
> > > > precise here.
> > > 
> > > Ah fair. In that case the attach_dev() documentation should indicate that
> > > EINVAL is a hint, so that callers don't rely on it (currently words "must"
> > > and "exclusively" indicate that returning EINVAL for anything other than
> > > device-domain incompatibility is unacceptable). The virtio-iommu
> > > implementation may well return EINVAL from the virtio stack or from the
> > > host response.
> > 
> > How about this?
> > 
> > + * * EINVAL    - mainly, device and domain are incompatible, or something went
> > + *               wrong with the domain. It's suggested to avoid kernel prints
> > + *               along with this errno. And it's better to convert any EINVAL
> > + *               returned from kAPIs to ENODEV if it is device-specific, or to
> > + *               some other reasonable errno being listed below
> 
> FWIW, I'd say something like:
> 
> "The device and domain are incompatible. If this is due to some previous
> configuration of the domain, drivers should not log an error, since it
> is legitimate for callers to test reuse of an existing domain.
> Otherwise, it may still represent some fundamental problem."

OK. I will use this narrative.

> And then at the public interfaces state it from other angle:
> 
> "The device and domain are incompatible. If the domain has already been
> used or configured in some way, attaching the same device to a different
> domain may be expected to succeed. Otherwise, it may still represent
> some fundamental problem."

I assume this should go to kdocs of iommu_attach_device/group().

> [ and to save another mail, I'm not sure copying the default comment for
> ENOSPC is all that helpful either - what is "space" for something that
> isn't a storage device? I'd guess limited hardware resources in some
> form, but in the IOMMU context, potential confusion with address space
> is maybe a little too close for comfort? ]

How about "non-ENOMEM type of resource allocation failure"?

> > > > > Since we can't guarantee that APIs like virtio or ida won't ever return
> > > > > EINVAL, we should set all return values:
> > > > 
> > > > I dislike this alot, it squashes all return codes to try to optimize
> > > > an obscure failure path :(
> > 
> > Hmm...should I revert all the driver changes back to this version?
> 
> Yeah, I don't think we need to go too mad here. Drivers shouldn't emit
> their *own* -EINVAL unless appropriate, but if it comes back from some
> external API then that implies something's gone unexpectedly wrong
> anyway - maybe it's a transient condition and a subsequent different
> attach might actually work out OK? We can't really say in general.

OK. Then there's even no need to convert EINVAL to ENODEV.

> Besides, if the driver sees an error which implies it's done something
> wrong itself, it probably shouldn't be trusted to try to reason about it
> further. The caller can handle any error as long as we set their
> expectations correctly.

Yea. As Jason remarked, a wrongly returned EINVAL would make things
a bit inefficient: VFIO/IOMMUFD would keep trying attach_dev() with
its existing domain list and a new domain but fail all of them.

I will change things in v2 back to this 2-patch version, and maybe
limit a bit further the changes in the first NODEV patch.

Thanks!
Nic

_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: heiko@sntech.de, konrad.dybcio@somainline.org,
	bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
	thierry.reding@gmail.com, will@kernel.org,
	Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
	zhang.lyra@gmail.com, joro@8bytes.org, jon@solid-run.com,
	jonathanh@nvidia.com, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, agross@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	yangyingliang@huawei.com, orsonzhai@gmail.com,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr,
	baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, thunder.leizhen@huawei.com,
	matthias.bgg@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, yong.wu@mediatek.com,
	dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com, robdclark@gmail.com,
	suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, sricharan@codeaurora.org,
	baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] iommu: Regulate errno in ->attach_dev callback functions
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 13:55:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YyI/rLRu1qQ57LM0@Asurada-Nvidia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f049bb8-76e6-901a-9f8e-b48d270bc4a0@arm.com>

Hi Robin,

On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 08:53:07PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> On 2022-09-14 18:58, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:49:42AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 06:11:06AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 01:27:03PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > > > I think in the future it will be too easy to forget about the constrained
> > > > > return value of attach() while modifying some other part of the driver,
> > > > > and let an external helper return EINVAL. So I'd rather not propagate ret
> > > > > from outside of viommu_domain_attach() and finalise().
> > > > 
> > > > Fortunately, if -EINVAL is wrongly returned it only creates an
> > > > inefficiency, not a functional problem. So we do not need to be
> > > > precise here.
> > > 
> > > Ah fair. In that case the attach_dev() documentation should indicate that
> > > EINVAL is a hint, so that callers don't rely on it (currently words "must"
> > > and "exclusively" indicate that returning EINVAL for anything other than
> > > device-domain incompatibility is unacceptable). The virtio-iommu
> > > implementation may well return EINVAL from the virtio stack or from the
> > > host response.
> > 
> > How about this?
> > 
> > + * * EINVAL    - mainly, device and domain are incompatible, or something went
> > + *               wrong with the domain. It's suggested to avoid kernel prints
> > + *               along with this errno. And it's better to convert any EINVAL
> > + *               returned from kAPIs to ENODEV if it is device-specific, or to
> > + *               some other reasonable errno being listed below
> 
> FWIW, I'd say something like:
> 
> "The device and domain are incompatible. If this is due to some previous
> configuration of the domain, drivers should not log an error, since it
> is legitimate for callers to test reuse of an existing domain.
> Otherwise, it may still represent some fundamental problem."

OK. I will use this narrative.

> And then at the public interfaces state it from other angle:
> 
> "The device and domain are incompatible. If the domain has already been
> used or configured in some way, attaching the same device to a different
> domain may be expected to succeed. Otherwise, it may still represent
> some fundamental problem."

I assume this should go to kdocs of iommu_attach_device/group().

> [ and to save another mail, I'm not sure copying the default comment for
> ENOSPC is all that helpful either - what is "space" for something that
> isn't a storage device? I'd guess limited hardware resources in some
> form, but in the IOMMU context, potential confusion with address space
> is maybe a little too close for comfort? ]

How about "non-ENOMEM type of resource allocation failure"?

> > > > > Since we can't guarantee that APIs like virtio or ida won't ever return
> > > > > EINVAL, we should set all return values:
> > > > 
> > > > I dislike this alot, it squashes all return codes to try to optimize
> > > > an obscure failure path :(
> > 
> > Hmm...should I revert all the driver changes back to this version?
> 
> Yeah, I don't think we need to go too mad here. Drivers shouldn't emit
> their *own* -EINVAL unless appropriate, but if it comes back from some
> external API then that implies something's gone unexpectedly wrong
> anyway - maybe it's a transient condition and a subsequent different
> attach might actually work out OK? We can't really say in general.

OK. Then there's even no need to convert EINVAL to ENODEV.

> Besides, if the driver sees an error which implies it's done something
> wrong itself, it probably shouldn't be trusted to try to reason about it
> further. The caller can handle any error as long as we set their
> expectations correctly.

Yea. As Jason remarked, a wrongly returned EINVAL would make things
a bit inefficient: VFIO/IOMMUFD would keep trying attach_dev() with
its existing domain list and a new domain but fail all of them.

I will change things in v2 back to this 2-patch version, and maybe
limit a bit further the changes in the first NODEV patch.

Thanks!
Nic

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-14 20:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-13  8:24 [PATCH 0/5] iommu: Define EINVAL as device/domain incompatibility Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` [PATCH 1/5] iommu/msm: Add missing __disable_clocks calls Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` [PATCH 2/5] iommu/amd: Drop unnecessary checks in amd_iommu_attach_device() Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` [PATCH 3/5] iommu: Add return errno rules to ->attach_dev ops Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13 18:41   ` Jeff Johnson
2022-09-13 18:41     ` Jeff Johnson
2022-09-13 18:41     ` Jeff Johnson
2022-09-13 20:00     ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13 20:00       ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13 20:00       ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` [PATCH 4/5] iommu: Regulate errno in ->attach_dev callback functions Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13 12:27   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-13 12:27     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-13 12:27     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-13 12:27     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-13 20:14     ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13 20:14       ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13 20:14       ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-14  9:11     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-14  9:11       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-14  9:11       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-14  9:49       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-14  9:49         ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-14  9:49         ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-14  9:49         ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-09-14 17:58         ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-14 17:58           ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-14 17:58           ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-14 19:53           ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-14 19:53             ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-14 19:53             ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-14 19:53             ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-14 20:55             ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2022-09-14 20:55               ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-14 20:55               ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24 ` [PATCH 5/5] iommu: Use EINVAL for incompatible device/domain in ->attach_dev Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` Nicolin Chen
2022-09-13  8:24   ` 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=YyI/rLRu1qQ57LM0@Asurada-Nvidia \
    --to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=agross@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
    --cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jon@solid-run.com \
    --cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=konrad.dybcio@somainline.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=orsonzhai@gmail.com \
    --cc=robdclark@gmail.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
    --cc=sricharan@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
    --cc=vdumpa@nvidia.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yangyingliang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yong.wu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=zhang.lyra@gmail.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: link
Be 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.