kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Shenming Lu <lushenming@huawei.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
	Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>, <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>, <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	Barry Song <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>,
	<wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>, <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/8] vfio/type1: Add a page fault handler
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 12:58:37 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210518125837.6de73631.alex.williamson@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210409034420.1799-3-lushenming@huawei.com>

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 11:44:14 +0800
Shenming Lu <lushenming@huawei.com> wrote:

> VFIO manages the DMA mapping itself. To support IOPF (on-demand paging)
> for VFIO (IOMMU capable) devices, we add a VFIO page fault handler to
> serve the reported page faults from the IOMMU driver.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shenming Lu <lushenming@huawei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 114 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 114 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> index 45cbfd4879a5..ab0ff60ee207 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ struct vfio_dma {
>  	struct task_struct	*task;
>  	struct rb_root		pfn_list;	/* Ex-user pinned pfn list */
>  	unsigned long		*bitmap;
> +	unsigned long		*iopf_mapped_bitmap;
>  };
>  
>  struct vfio_batch {
> @@ -141,6 +142,16 @@ struct vfio_regions {
>  	size_t len;
>  };
>  
> +/* A global IOPF enabled group list */
> +static struct rb_root iopf_group_list = RB_ROOT;
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(iopf_group_list_lock);
> +
> +struct vfio_iopf_group {
> +	struct rb_node		node;
> +	struct iommu_group	*iommu_group;
> +	struct vfio_iommu	*iommu;
> +};
> +
>  #define IS_IOMMU_CAP_DOMAIN_IN_CONTAINER(iommu)	\
>  					(!list_empty(&iommu->domain_list))
>  
> @@ -157,6 +168,10 @@ struct vfio_regions {
>  #define DIRTY_BITMAP_PAGES_MAX	 ((u64)INT_MAX)
>  #define DIRTY_BITMAP_SIZE_MAX	 DIRTY_BITMAP_BYTES(DIRTY_BITMAP_PAGES_MAX)
>  
> +#define IOPF_MAPPED_BITMAP_GET(dma, i)	\
> +			      ((dma->iopf_mapped_bitmap[(i) / BITS_PER_LONG]	\
> +			       >> ((i) % BITS_PER_LONG)) & 0x1)


Can't we just use test_bit()?


> +
>  #define WAITED 1
>  
>  static int put_pfn(unsigned long pfn, int prot);
> @@ -416,6 +431,34 @@ static int vfio_iova_put_vfio_pfn(struct vfio_dma *dma, struct vfio_pfn *vpfn)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Helper functions for iopf_group_list
> + */
> +static struct vfio_iopf_group *
> +vfio_find_iopf_group(struct iommu_group *iommu_group)
> +{
> +	struct vfio_iopf_group *iopf_group;
> +	struct rb_node *node;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&iopf_group_list_lock);
> +
> +	node = iopf_group_list.rb_node;
> +
> +	while (node) {
> +		iopf_group = rb_entry(node, struct vfio_iopf_group, node);
> +
> +		if (iommu_group < iopf_group->iommu_group)
> +			node = node->rb_left;
> +		else if (iommu_group > iopf_group->iommu_group)
> +			node = node->rb_right;
> +		else
> +			break;
> +	}
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&iopf_group_list_lock);
> +	return node ? iopf_group : NULL;
> +}

This looks like a pretty heavy weight operation per DMA fault.

I'm also suspicious of this validity of this iopf_group after we've
dropped the locking, the ordering of patches makes this very confusing.

> +
>  static int vfio_lock_acct(struct vfio_dma *dma, long npage, bool async)
>  {
>  	struct mm_struct *mm;
> @@ -3106,6 +3149,77 @@ static int vfio_iommu_type1_dirty_pages(struct vfio_iommu *iommu,
>  	return -EINVAL;
>  }
>  
> +/* VFIO I/O Page Fault handler */
> +static int vfio_iommu_type1_dma_map_iopf(struct iommu_fault *fault, void *data)

From the comment, this seems like the IOMMU fault handler (the
construction of this series makes this difficult to follow) and
eventually it handles more than DMA mapping, for example transferring
faults to the device driver.  "dma_map_iopf" seems like a poorly scoped
name.

> +{
> +	struct device *dev = (struct device *)data;
> +	struct iommu_group *iommu_group;
> +	struct vfio_iopf_group *iopf_group;
> +	struct vfio_iommu *iommu;
> +	struct vfio_dma *dma;
> +	dma_addr_t iova = ALIGN_DOWN(fault->prm.addr, PAGE_SIZE);
> +	int access_flags = 0;
> +	unsigned long bit_offset, vaddr, pfn;
> +	int ret;
> +	enum iommu_page_response_code status = IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_INVALID;
> +	struct iommu_page_response resp = {0};
> +
> +	if (fault->type != IOMMU_FAULT_PAGE_REQ)
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> +	iommu_group = iommu_group_get(dev);
> +	if (!iommu_group)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	iopf_group = vfio_find_iopf_group(iommu_group);
> +	iommu_group_put(iommu_group);
> +	if (!iopf_group)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	iommu = iopf_group->iommu;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&iommu->lock);

Again, I'm dubious of our ability to grab this lock from an object with
an unknown lifecycle and races we might have with that group being
detached or DMA unmapped.  Also, how effective is enabling IOMMU page
faulting if we're serializing all faults within a container context?

> +
> +	ret = vfio_find_dma_valid(iommu, iova, PAGE_SIZE, &dma);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		goto out_invalid;
> +
> +	if (fault->prm.perm & IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_READ)
> +		access_flags |= IOMMU_READ;
> +	if (fault->prm.perm & IOMMU_FAULT_PERM_WRITE)
> +		access_flags |= IOMMU_WRITE;
> +	if ((dma->prot & access_flags) != access_flags)
> +		goto out_invalid;
> +
> +	bit_offset = (iova - dma->iova) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +	if (IOPF_MAPPED_BITMAP_GET(dma, bit_offset))
> +		goto out_success;

If the page is mapped, why did we get a fault?  Should we be returning
success for a fault we shouldn't have received and did nothing to
resolve?  We're also referencing a bitmap that has only been declared
and never allocated at this point in the patch series.

> +
> +	vaddr = iova - dma->iova + dma->vaddr;
> +
> +	if (vfio_pin_page_external(dma, vaddr, &pfn, true))
> +		goto out_invalid;
> +
> +	if (vfio_iommu_map(iommu, iova, pfn, 1, dma->prot)) {
> +		if (put_pfn(pfn, dma->prot))
> +			vfio_lock_acct(dma, -1, true);
> +		goto out_invalid;
> +	}
> +
> +	bitmap_set(dma->iopf_mapped_bitmap, bit_offset, 1);
> +
> +out_success:
> +	status = IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_SUCCESS;
> +
> +out_invalid:
> +	mutex_unlock(&iommu->lock);
> +	resp.version		= IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_VERSION_1;
> +	resp.grpid		= fault->prm.grpid;
> +	resp.code		= status;
> +	iommu_page_response(dev, &resp);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static long vfio_iommu_type1_ioctl(void *iommu_data,
>  				   unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  {


  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-18 18:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-09  3:44 [RFC PATCH v3 0/8] Add IOPF support for VFIO passthrough Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/8] iommu: Evolve the device fault reporting framework Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:37     ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/8] vfio/type1: Add a page fault handler Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2021-05-21  6:38     ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-24 22:11       ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-27 11:16         ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/8] vfio/type1: Add an MMU notifier to avoid pinning Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:37     ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/8] vfio/type1: Pre-map more pages than requested in the IOPF handling Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:37     ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/8] vfio/type1: VFIO_IOMMU_ENABLE_IOPF Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:38     ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-24 22:11       ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-27 11:15         ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 6/8] vfio/type1: No need to statically pin and map if IOPF enabled Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:39     ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 7/8] vfio/type1: Add selective DMA faulting support Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:39     ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-09  3:44 ` [RFC PATCH v3 8/8] vfio: Add nested IOPF support Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:58   ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  7:59     ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-24 13:11       ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-24 22:11         ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-27 11:03           ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-27 11:18             ` Lu Baolu
2021-06-01  4:36               ` Shenming Lu
2021-04-26  1:41 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/8] Add IOPF support for VFIO passthrough Shenming Lu
2021-05-11 11:30   ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-18 18:57 ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-21  6:37   ` Shenming Lu
2021-05-24 22:11     ` Alex Williamson
2021-05-27 11:25       ` Shenming Lu

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=20210518125837.6de73631.alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lushenming@huawei.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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 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).