Re: [RFC PATCH 01/11] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add feature detection for HTTU - Jean-Philippe Brucker

From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
To: Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	jiangkunkun@huawei.com, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	lushenming@huawei.com, Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/11] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add feature detection for HTTU
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 10:51:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YB0VErwkA0ivRXTd@myrica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <df1b8fb2-b853-e797-0072-9dbdffc4ff67@huawei.com>

Hi Keqian,

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 05:13:50PM +0800, Keqian Zhu wrote:
> > We need to accommodate the firmware override as well if we need this to be meaningful. Jean-Philippe is already carrying a suitable patch in the SVA stack[1].
> Robin, Thanks for pointing it out.
> 
> Jean, I see that the IORT HTTU flag overrides the hardware register info unconditionally. I have some concern about it:
> 
> If the override flag has HTTU but hardware doesn't support it, then driver will use this feature but receive access fault or permission fault from SMMU unexpectedly.
> 1) If IOPF is not supported, then kernel can not work normally.
> 2) If IOPF is supported, kernel will perform useless actions, such as HTTU based dma dirty tracking (this series).
> 
> As the IORT spec doesn't give an explicit explanation for HTTU override, can we comprehend it as a mask for HTTU related hardware register?

To me "Overrides the value of SMMU_IDR0.HTTU" is clear enough: disregard
the value of SMMU_IDR0.HTTU and use the one specified by IORT instead. And
that's both ways, since there is no validity mask for the IORT value: if
there is an IORT table, always ignore SMMU_IDR0.HTTU.

That's how the SMMU driver implements the COHACC bit, which has the same
wording in IORT. So I think we should implement HTTU the same way.

One complication is that there is no equivalent override for device tree.
I think it can be added later if necessary, because unlike IORT it can be
tri state (property not present, overriden positive, overridden negative).

Thanks,
Jean