Re: [PATCH v7 13/23] iommu/smmuv3: Implement attach/detach_pasid_table

[Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>]

On 08/04/2019 13:19, Eric Auger wrote:
> On attach_pasid_table() we program STE S1 related info set
> by the guest into the actual physical STEs. At minimum
> we need to program the context descriptor GPA and compute
> whether the stage1 is translated/bypassed or aborted.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
> 
> ---
> v6 -> v7:
> - check versions and comment the fact we don't need to take
>    into account s1dss and s1fmt
> v3 -> v4:
> - adapt to changes in iommu_pasid_table_config
> - different programming convention at s1_cfg/s2_cfg/ste.abort
> 
> v2 -> v3:
> - callback now is named set_pasid_table and struct fields
>    are laid out differently.
> 
> v1 -> v2:
> - invalidate the STE before changing them
> - hold init_mutex
> - handle new fields
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 121 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
> index e22e944ffc05..1486baf53425 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
> @@ -2207,6 +2207,125 @@ static void arm_smmu_put_resv_regions(struct device *dev,
>   		kfree(entry);
>   }
>   
> +static int arm_smmu_attach_pasid_table(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> +				       struct iommu_pasid_table_config *cfg)
> +{
> +	struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain);
> +	struct arm_smmu_master_data *entry;
> +	struct arm_smmu_s1_cfg *s1_cfg;
> +	struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (cfg->format != IOMMU_PASID_FORMAT_SMMUV3)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (cfg->version != PASID_TABLE_CFG_VERSION_1 ||
> +	    cfg->smmuv3.version != PASID_TABLE_SMMUV3_CFG_VERSION_1)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&smmu_domain->init_mutex);
> +
> +	smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
> +
> +	if (!smmu)
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	if (!((smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_TRANS_S1) &&
> +	      (smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_TRANS_S2))) {
> +		dev_info(smmu_domain->smmu->dev,
> +			 "does not implement two stages\n");
> +		goto out;
> +	}

That check is redundant (and frankly looks a little bit spammy). If the 
one below is not enough, there is a problem elsewhere - if it's possible 
for smmu_domain->stage to ever get set to ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED without 
both stages of translation present, we've already gone fundamentally wrong.

> +
> +	if (smmu_domain->stage != ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED)
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	switch (cfg->config) {
> +	case IOMMU_PASID_CONFIG_ABORT:
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +		list_for_each_entry(entry, &smmu_domain->devices, list) {
> +			entry->ste.s1_cfg = NULL;
> +			entry->ste.abort = true;
> +			arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev(entry->dev->iommu_fwspec);
> +		}
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +		ret = 0;
> +		break;
> +	case IOMMU_PASID_CONFIG_BYPASS:
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +		list_for_each_entry(entry, &smmu_domain->devices, list) {
> +			entry->ste.s1_cfg = NULL;
> +			entry->ste.abort = false;
> +			arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev(entry->dev->iommu_fwspec);
> +		}
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +		ret = 0;
> +		break;
> +	case IOMMU_PASID_CONFIG_TRANSLATE:
> +		/*
> +		 * we currently support a single CD so s1fmt and s1dss
> +		 * fields are also ignored
> +		 */
> +		if (cfg->pasid_bits)
> +			goto out;
> +
> +		s1_cfg = &smmu_domain->s1_cfg;
> +		s1_cfg->cdptr_dma = cfg->base_ptr;
> +
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +		list_for_each_entry(entry, &smmu_domain->devices, list) {
> +			entry->ste.s1_cfg = s1_cfg;

Either we reject valid->valid transitions outright, or we need to remove 
and invalidate the existing S1 context from the STE at this point, no?

> +			entry->ste.abort = false;
> +			arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev(entry->dev->iommu_fwspec);
> +		}
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +		ret = 0;
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		break;
> +	}
> +out:
> +	mutex_unlock(&smmu_domain->init_mutex);
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void arm_smmu_detach_pasid_table(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> +{
> +	struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain);
> +	struct arm_smmu_master_data *entry;
> +	struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&smmu_domain->init_mutex);
> +
> +	smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
> +
> +	if (!smmu)
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!((smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_TRANS_S1) &&
> +	      (smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_TRANS_S2))) {
> +		dev_info(smmu_domain->smmu->dev,
> +			 "does not implement two stages\n");
> +		return;
> +	}

Same comment as before.

Robin.

> +
> +	if (smmu_domain->stage != ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED)
> +		return;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +	list_for_each_entry(entry, &smmu_domain->devices, list) {
> +		entry->ste.s1_cfg = NULL;
> +		entry->ste.abort = true;
> +		arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev(entry->dev->iommu_fwspec);
> +	}
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smmu_domain->devices_lock, flags);
> +
> +	memset(&smmu_domain->s1_cfg, 0, sizeof(struct arm_smmu_s1_cfg));
> +	mutex_unlock(&smmu_domain->init_mutex);
> +}
> +
>   static struct iommu_ops arm_smmu_ops = {
>   	.capable		= arm_smmu_capable,
>   	.domain_alloc		= arm_smmu_domain_alloc,
> @@ -2225,6 +2344,8 @@ static struct iommu_ops arm_smmu_ops = {
>   	.of_xlate		= arm_smmu_of_xlate,
>   	.get_resv_regions	= arm_smmu_get_resv_regions,
>   	.put_resv_regions	= arm_smmu_put_resv_regions,
> +	.attach_pasid_table	= arm_smmu_attach_pasid_table,
> +	.detach_pasid_table	= arm_smmu_detach_pasid_table,
>   	.pgsize_bitmap		= -1UL, /* Restricted during device attach */
>   };
>   
> 
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm