From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3C20C433E1 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 07:16:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A749620738 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 07:16:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="GB61CQGN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A749620738 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:47016 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8IL1-0002Cg-SA for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 03:16:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41020) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8IKH-0001kw-M9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 03:16:01 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:34765 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8IKF-00010D-Gc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 03:16:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1597821358; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8jHmzx06/2osOzVPEye8hitZpel3LwuOtpbkg5JEU2A=; b=GB61CQGNUXRXblNpmgBSlIYwoZ1ARVQvSa4PeoRWg2toUkSD2RyFrJs4sgQZEAEYNFCUv/ AHQriwaka8WIG2k0f6hmrghXORF/6bEH6IA1iTusdedyBjsvdupsH+N8svYqHp/cEvkLcX fPy27rL3WBflkT4gnQjL3VaH+8j8+4s= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-422-dgwVeB18N2y0xpCWY_GxYQ-1; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 03:15:54 -0400 X-MC-Unique: dgwVeB18N2y0xpCWY_GxYQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5838D1084C85; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 07:15:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.72.13.88] (ovpn-13-88.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.13.88]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ACCA5C1D0; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 07:15:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFC v3 1/1] memory: Skip bad range assertion if notifier supports arbitrary masks To: Eugenio Perez Martin , Peter Xu References: <20200626064122.9252-1-eperezma@redhat.com> <20200811175533.7359-1-eperezma@redhat.com> <20200811175533.7359-2-eperezma@redhat.com> <2443886f-2109-e048-b47f-886c896613ab@redhat.com> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:15:26 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jasowang@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.139.110.120; envelope-from=jasowang@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/18 23:05:17 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -30 X-Spam_score: -3.1 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Maydell , Yan Zhao , Juan Quintela , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eric Auger , Avi Kivity , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 2020/8/18 下午10:24, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:49 AM Eugenio Perez Martin > wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 4:24 AM Jason Wang wrote: >>> On 2020/8/12 上午1:55, Eugenio Pérez wrote: >>>> Signed-off-by: Eugenio Pérez >>>> --- >>>> hw/virtio/vhost.c | 2 +- >>>> include/exec/memory.h | 2 ++ >>>> softmmu/memory.c | 10 ++++++++-- >>>> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost.c b/hw/virtio/vhost.c >>>> index 1a1384e7a6..e74ad9e09b 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/virtio/vhost.c >>>> +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost.c >>>> @@ -729,7 +729,7 @@ static void vhost_iommu_region_add(MemoryListener *listener, >>>> iommu_idx = memory_region_iommu_attrs_to_index(iommu_mr, >>>> MEMTXATTRS_UNSPECIFIED); >>>> iommu_notifier_init(&iommu->n, vhost_iommu_unmap_notify, >>>> - IOMMU_NOTIFIER_UNMAP, >>>> + IOMMU_NOTIFIER_UNMAP | IOMMU_NOTIFIER_IOTLB, >>> I think we can safely drop IOMMU_NOTIFIER_UNMAP here since device IOTLB >>> is sufficient. >>> >>> Btw, IOMMU_NOTIFIER_IOTLB is kind of confusing, maybe something like >>> IOMMU_NOTIFIER_DEVIOTLB. >>> >> Got it, will change. >> >>>> section->offset_within_region, >>>> int128_get64(end), >>>> iommu_idx); >>>> diff --git a/include/exec/memory.h b/include/exec/memory.h >>>> index 307e527835..4d94c1e984 100644 >>>> --- a/include/exec/memory.h >>>> +++ b/include/exec/memory.h >>>> @@ -87,6 +87,8 @@ typedef enum { >>>> IOMMU_NOTIFIER_UNMAP = 0x1, >>>> /* Notify entry changes (newly created entries) */ >>>> IOMMU_NOTIFIER_MAP = 0x2, >>>> + /* Notify changes on IOTLB entries */ >>>> + IOMMU_NOTIFIER_IOTLB = 0x04, >>>> } IOMMUNotifierFlag; >>>> >>>> #define IOMMU_NOTIFIER_ALL (IOMMU_NOTIFIER_MAP | IOMMU_NOTIFIER_UNMAP) >>>> diff --git a/softmmu/memory.c b/softmmu/memory.c >>>> index af25987518..e2c5f6d0e7 100644 >>>> --- a/softmmu/memory.c >>>> +++ b/softmmu/memory.c >>>> @@ -1895,6 +1895,7 @@ void memory_region_notify_one(IOMMUNotifier *notifier, >>> (we probably need a better name of this function, at least something >>> like "memory_region_iommu_notify_one"). >>> >> Ok will change. >> >>>> { >>>> IOMMUNotifierFlag request_flags; >>>> hwaddr entry_end = entry->iova + entry->addr_mask; >>>> + IOMMUTLBEntry tmp = *entry; >>>> >>>> /* >>>> * Skip the notification if the notification does not overlap >>>> @@ -1904,7 +1905,12 @@ void memory_region_notify_one(IOMMUNotifier *notifier, >>>> return; >>>> } >>>> >>>> - assert(entry->iova >= notifier->start && entry_end <= notifier->end); >>>> + if (notifier->notifier_flags & IOMMU_NOTIFIER_IOTLB) { >>>> + tmp.iova = MAX(tmp.iova, notifier->start); >>>> + tmp.addr_mask = MIN(entry_end, notifier->end) - tmp.iova; >>> Any reason for doing such re-calculation here, a comment would be helpful. >>> >> It was proposed by Peter, but I understand as limiting the >> address+range we pass to the notifier. Although vhost seems to support >> it as long as it contains (notifier->start, notifier->end) in range, a >> future notifier might not. Yes, actually, I feel confused after reading the codes. Is notifier->start IOVA or GPA? In vfio.c, we did:         iommu_notifier_init(&giommu->n, vfio_iommu_map_notify,                             IOMMU_NOTIFIER_ALL,                             section->offset_within_region,                             int128_get64(llend),                             iommu_idx); So it looks to me the start and end are GPA, but the assertion above check it against IOVA which seems to be wrong .... Thanks >> >> It could be done as iommu_entry_crop(IOMMUTLBEntry *entry, const >> IOMMUNotifier *notifier) though.