From: Jon Nettleton <jon@solid-run.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
joro@8bytes.org, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
wanghuiqiang <wanghuiqiang@huawei.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Sami.Mujawar@arm.com, eric.auger@redhat.com,
yangyicong <yangyicong@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu: Get associated RMR info and install bypass SMR
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 13:51:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABdtJHts-fO4pLU1VQddW0ra-tuh7s7j-eb3CJy6cFjv875UJg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32dc72fa-534a-7eb4-dfcc-9bc244845a28@arm.com>
On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 1:27 PM Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 03/06/2021 09:52, Jon Nettleton wrote:
> > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 1:04 PM Shameer Kolothum
> > <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Jon Nettleton <jon@solid-run.com>
> >>
> >> Check if there is any RMR info associated with the devices behind
> >> the SMMU and if any, install bypass SMRs for them. This is to
> >> keep any ongoing traffic associated with these devices alive
> >> when we enable/reset SMMU during probe().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jon Nettleton <jon@solid-run.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
> >> index 6f72c4d208ca..56db3d3238fc 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
> >> @@ -2042,6 +2042,67 @@ err_reset_platform_ops: __maybe_unused;
> >> return err;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static void arm_smmu_rmr_install_bypass_smr(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> >> +{
> >> + struct list_head rmr_list;
> >> + struct iommu_resv_region *e;
> >> + int i, cnt = 0;
> >> + u32 smr;
> >> + u32 reg;
> >> +
> >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rmr_list);
> >> + if (iommu_dma_get_rmrs(dev_fwnode(smmu->dev), &rmr_list))
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + reg = arm_smmu_gr0_read(smmu, ARM_SMMU_GR0_sCR0);
> >> +
> >> + if ((reg & ARM_SMMU_sCR0_USFCFG) && !(reg & ARM_SMMU_sCR0_CLIENTPD)) {
> >> + /*
> >> + * SMMU is already enabled and disallowing bypass, so preserve
> >> + * the existing SMRs
> >> + */
> >> + for (i = 0; i < smmu->num_mapping_groups; i++) {
> >> + smr = arm_smmu_gr0_read(smmu, ARM_SMMU_GR0_SMR(i));
> >> + if (!FIELD_GET(ARM_SMMU_SMR_VALID, smr))
> >> + continue;
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].id = FIELD_GET(ARM_SMMU_SMR_ID, smr);
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].mask = FIELD_GET(ARM_SMMU_SMR_MASK, smr);
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].valid = true;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + list_for_each_entry(e, &rmr_list, list) {
> >> + u32 sid = e->fw_data.rmr.sid;
> >> +
> >> + i = arm_smmu_find_sme(smmu, sid, ~0);
> >> + if (i < 0)
> >> + continue;
> >> + if (smmu->s2crs[i].count == 0) {
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].id = sid;
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].mask = ~0;
>
> Looking at this code again, that mask looks wrong! According to the SMMU
> spec MASK[i]==1 means ID[i] is ignored. I.e. this means completely
> ignore the ID...
>
> I'm not at all sure why they designed the hardware that way round.
>
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].valid = true;
> >> + }
> >> + smmu->s2crs[i].count++;
> >> + smmu->s2crs[i].type = S2CR_TYPE_BYPASS;
> >> + smmu->s2crs[i].privcfg = S2CR_PRIVCFG_DEFAULT;
> >> + smmu->s2crs[i].cbndx = 0xff;
> >> +
> >> + cnt++;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + if ((reg & ARM_SMMU_sCR0_USFCFG) && !(reg & ARM_SMMU_sCR0_CLIENTPD)) {
> >> + /* Remove the valid bit for unused SMRs */
> >> + for (i = 0; i < smmu->num_mapping_groups; i++) {
> >> + if (smmu->s2crs[i].count == 0)
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].valid = false;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + dev_notice(smmu->dev, "\tpreserved %d boot mapping%s\n", cnt,
> >> + cnt == 1 ? "" : "s");
> >> + iommu_dma_put_rmrs(dev_fwnode(smmu->dev), &rmr_list);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static int arm_smmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> {
> >> struct resource *res;
> >> @@ -2168,6 +2229,10 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> }
> >>
> >> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, smmu);
> >> +
> >> + /* Check for RMRs and install bypass SMRs if any */
> >> + arm_smmu_rmr_install_bypass_smr(smmu);
> >> +
> >> arm_smmu_device_reset(smmu);
> >> arm_smmu_test_smr_masks(smmu);
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.17.1
> >>
> >
> > Shameer and Robin
> >
> > I finally got around to updating edk2 and the HoneyComb IORT tables to
> > reflect the new standards.
> > Out of the box the new patchset was generating errors immediatly after
> > the smmu bringup.
> >
> > arm-smmu arm-smmu.0.auto: Unhandled context fault: fsr=0x402, iova=0x2080000140,
> > fsynr=0x1d0040, cbfrsynra=0x4000, cb=0
> >
> > These errors were generated even with disable_bypass=0
> >
> > I tracked down the issue to
> >
> > This code is skipped as Robin said would be correct
>
> If you're skipping the first bit of code, then that (hopefully) means
> that the SMMU is disabled...
>
> >> + if ((reg & ARM_SMMU_sCR0_USFCFG) && !(reg & ARM_SMMU_sCR0_CLIENTPD)) {
> >> + /*
> >> + * SMMU is already enabled and disallowing bypass, so preserve
> >> + * the existing SMRs
> >> + */
> >> + for (i = 0; i < smmu->num_mapping_groups; i++) {
> >> + smr = arm_smmu_gr0_read(smmu, ARM_SMMU_GR0_SMR(i));
> >> + if (!FIELD_GET(ARM_SMMU_SMR_VALID, smr))
> >> + continue;
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].id = FIELD_GET(ARM_SMMU_SMR_ID, smr);
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].mask = FIELD_GET(ARM_SMMU_SMR_MASK, smr);
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].valid = true;
> >> + }[ 2.707729] arm-smmu: setting up rmr list on 0x4000
> > [ 2.712598] arm-smmu: s2crs count is 0 smrs index 0x0
> > [ 2.717638] arm-smmu: s2crs count is 0 smrs id is 0x4000
> > [ 2.722939] arm-smmu: s2crs count is 0 smrs mask is 0x8000
> > [ 2.728417] arm-smmu arm-smmu.0.auto: preserved 1 boot mapping
> >
> >> + }
> >
> > Then this code block was hit which is correct
> >
> >> + if (smmu->s2crs[i].count == 0) {
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].id = sid;
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].mask = ~0;
> >> + smmu->smrs[i].valid = true;
> >> + }
> >
> > The mask was causing the issue. If I think ammended that segment to read
> > the mask as setup by the hardware everything was back to functioning both
> > with and without disable_bypass set.
>
> ...so reading a mask from it doesn't sounds quite right.
>
> Can you have a go with a corrected mask of '0' rather than all-1s and
> see if that helps? My guess is that the mask of ~0 was causing multiple
> matches in the SMRs which is 'UNPREDICTABLE'.
>
> Sadly in my test setup there's only the one device behind the SMMU so
> I didn't spot this (below patch works for me, but that's not saying
> much).
>
> Steve
>
> --->8---
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
> index 56db3d3238fc..44831d0c78e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
> @@ -2079,7 +2079,7 @@ static void arm_smmu_rmr_install_bypass_smr(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> continue;
> if (smmu->s2crs[i].count == 0) {
> smmu->smrs[i].id = sid;
> - smmu->smrs[i].mask = ~0;
> + smmu->smrs[i].mask = 0;
> smmu->smrs[i].valid = true;
> }
> smmu->s2crs[i].count++;
Yes this works fine. Thanks
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-03 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-24 11:02 [PATCH v5 0/8] ACPI/IORT: Support for IORT RMR node Shameer Kolothum
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 1/8] ACPI/IORT: Add support for RMR node parsing Shameer Kolothum
2021-06-14 11:14 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-14 12:37 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 2/8] iommu/dma: Introduce generic helper to retrieve RMR info Shameer Kolothum
2021-05-24 15:35 ` kernel test robot
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 3/8] ACPI/IORT: Add a helper to retrieve RMR memory regions Shameer Kolothum
2021-05-26 7:53 ` Laurentiu Tudor
2021-05-26 16:36 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-05-26 17:11 ` Laurentiu Tudor
2021-06-03 12:27 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-03 12:32 ` Laurentiu Tudor
2021-05-27 4:25 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-14 10:35 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-14 11:23 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-14 12:49 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-06-29 17:34 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-07-04 7:38 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-07-05 9:10 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce strtab init helper Shameer Kolothum
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 5/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add bypass flag to arm_smmu_write_strtab_ent() Shameer Kolothum
2021-06-14 10:23 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-14 12:51 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 6/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Get associated RMR info and install Shameer Kolothum
2021-06-14 10:15 ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu: Get associated RMR info and install bypass SMR Shameer Kolothum
2021-06-03 8:52 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-03 11:27 ` Steven Price
2021-06-03 11:51 ` Jon Nettleton [this message]
2021-06-13 7:40 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-14 9:23 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-14 10:06 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-14 16:51 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-06-15 8:02 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-29 7:03 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-29 13:22 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-29 16:25 ` Jon Nettleton
2021-06-30 8:50 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-05-24 11:02 ` [PATCH v5 8/8] iommu/dma: Reserve any RMR regions associated with a dev Shameer Kolothum
2021-05-24 15:18 ` [PATCH v5 0/8] ACPI/IORT: Support for IORT RMR node Steven Price
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=CABdtJHts-fO4pLU1VQddW0ra-tuh7s7j-eb3CJy6cFjv875UJg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jon@solid-run.com \
--cc=Sami.Mujawar@arm.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=wanghuiqiang@huawei.com \
--cc=yangyicong@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).