Re: [PATCH] iommu/mediatek: Move the tlb_sync into tlb_flush

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

On 02/10/2019 06:18, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Yong,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 2:42 PM Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com> wrote:
>>
>> The commit 4d689b619445 ("iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: Convert to IOMMU API
>> TLB sync") help move the tlb_sync of unmap from v7s into the iommu
>> framework. It helps add a new function "mtk_iommu_iotlb_sync", But it
>> lacked the dom->pgtlock, then it will cause the variable
>> "tlb_flush_active" may be changed unexpectedly, we could see this warning
>> log randomly:
>>
> 
> Thanks for the patch! Please see my comments inline.
> 
>> mtk-iommu 10205000.iommu: Partial TLB flush timed out, falling back to
>> full flush
>>
>> To fix this issue, we can add dom->pgtlock in the "mtk_iommu_iotlb_sync".
>> And when checking this issue, we find that __arm_v7s_unmap call
>> io_pgtable_tlb_add_flush consecutively when it is supersection/largepage,
>> this also is potential unsafe for us. There is no tlb flush queue in the
>> MediaTek M4U HW. The HW always expect the tlb_flush/tlb_sync one by one.
>> If v7s don't always gurarantee the sequence, Thus, In this patch I move
>> the tlb_sync into tlb_flush(also rename the function deleting "_nosync").
>> and we don't care if it is leaf, rearrange the callback functions. Also,
>> the tlb flush/sync was already finished in v7s, then iotlb_sync and
>> iotlb_sync_all is unnecessary.
> 
> Performance-wise, we could do much better. Instead of synchronously
> syncing at the end of mtk_iommu_tlb_add_flush(), we could sync at the
> beginning, if there was any previous flush still pending. We would
> also have to keep the .iotlb_sync() callback, to take care of waiting
> for the last flush. That would allow better pipelining with CPU in
> cases like this:
> 
> for (all pages in range) {
>     change page table();
>     flush();
> }
> 
> "change page table()" could execute while the IOMMU is flushing the
> previous change.

FWIW, given that the underlying invalidation mechanism is range-based, 
this driver would be an ideal candidate for making use of the new 
iommu_gather mechanism. As a fix for stable, though, simply ensuring 
that add_flush syncs any pending invalidation before issuing a new one 
sounds like a good idea (and probably a simpler patch too).

[...]
>> @@ -574,8 +539,7 @@ static int mtk_iommu_of_xlate(struct device *dev, struct of_phandle_args *args)
>>          .detach_dev     = mtk_iommu_detach_device,
>>          .map            = mtk_iommu_map,
>>          .unmap          = mtk_iommu_unmap,
>> -       .flush_iotlb_all = mtk_iommu_flush_iotlb_all,
> 
> Don't we still want .flush_iotlb_all()? I think it should be more
> efficient in some cases than doing a big number of single flushes.
> (That said, the previous implementation didn't do any flush at all. It
> just waited for previously queued flushes to happen. Was that
> expected?)

Commit 07fdef34d2be ("iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Implement flush_iotlb_all 
hook") has an explanation of what the deal was there - similarly, it's 
probably worth this driver implementing it properly as well now (but 
that's really a separate patch).

Robin.
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu