Re: [PATCH V8 07/11] iommu: of: Handle IOMMU lookup failure with deferred probing or error

[sricharan@codeaurora.org]

Hi Laurent,

On 2017-05-16 03:04, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Sricharan,
> 
> On Monday 15 May 2017 23:37:16 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> On Wednesday 03 May 2017 15:54:59 Sricharan R wrote:
>> > On 5/3/2017 3:24 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> >> On 02/05/17 19:35, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Sricharan R wrote:
>> >>>> From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Failures to look up an IOMMU when parsing the DT iommus property need
>> >>>> to be handled separately from the .of_xlate() failures to support
>> >>>> deferred probing.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The lack of a registered IOMMU can be caused by the lack of a driver
>> >>>> for the IOMMU, the IOMMU device probe not having been performed yet,
>> >>>> having been deferred, or having failed.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The first case occurs when the device tree describes the bus master
>> >>>> and IOMMU topology correctly but no device driver exists for the IOMMU
>> >>>> yet or the device driver has not been compiled in. Return NULL, the
>> >>>> caller will configure the device without an IOMMU.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The second and third cases are handled by deferring the probe of the
>> >>>> bus master device which will eventually get reprobed after the IOMMU.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The last case is currently handled by deferring the probe of the bus
>> >>>> master device as well. A mechanism to either configure the bus master
>> >>>> device without an IOMMU or to fail the bus master device probe
>> >>>> depending on whether the IOMMU is optional or mandatory would be a good
>> >>>> enhancement.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pichart
>> >>>> <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <sricharan@codeaurora.org>
>> >>>
>> >>> This patch broke Renesas R-Car Gen3 platforms in renesas-drivers.
>> >>> As the IOMMU nodes in DT are not yet enabled, all devices having iommus
>> >>> properties in DT now fail to probe.
>> >>
>> >> How exactly do they fail to probe? Per d7b0558230e4, if there are no ops
>> >> registered then they should merely defer until we reach the point of
>> >> giving up and ignoring the IOMMU. Is it just that you have no other
>> >> late-probing drivers or post-init module loads to kick the deferred
>> >> queue after that point? I did try to find a way to explicitly kick it
>> >> from a suitably late initcall, but there didn't seem to be any obvious
>> >> public interface - anyone have any suggestions?
>> >>
>> >> I think that's more of a general problem with the probe deferral
>> >> mechanism itself (I've seen the same thing happen with some of the
>> >> CoreSight stuff on Juno due to the number of inter-component
>> >> dependencies) rather than any specific fault of this series.
>> >
>> > I was thinking of an additional check like below to avoid the
>> > situation ?
>> >
>> > From 499b6e662f60f23740b8880882b0a16f16434501 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> > From: Sricharan R <sricharan@codeaurora.org>
>> > Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 13:16:59 +0530
>> > Subject: [PATCH] iommu: of: Fix check for returning EPROBE_DEFER
>> >
>> > While returning EPROBE_DEFER for iommu masters
>> > take in to account of iommu nodes that could be
>> > marked in DT as 'status=disabled', in which case
>> > simply return NULL and let the master's probe
>> > continue rather than deferring.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <sricharan@codeaurora.org>
>> > ---
>> >
>> >  drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c | 1 +
>> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
>> > index 9f44ee8..e6e9bec 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
>> > @@ -118,6 +118,7 @@ static bool of_iommu_driver_present(struct device_node
>> > *np)
>> >
>> >         ops = iommu_ops_from_fwnode(fwnode);
>> >         if ((ops && !ops->of_xlate) ||
>> > +           !of_device_is_available(iommu_spec->np) ||
>> >             (!ops && !of_iommu_driver_present(iommu_spec->np)))
>> >                 return NULL;
>> 
>> This looks good to me, but won't be enough. The ipmmu-vmsa driver in
>> v4.12-rc1 doesn't call iommu_device_register() and thus won't be found 
>> by
>> iommu_ops_from_fwnode(). Furthermore, it doesn't IOMMU_OF_DECLARE(), 
>> and
>> thus will always be considered as absent.
>> 
>> I agree that the ipmmu-vmsa driver needs to be fixed, but it would 
>> have been
>> nice to check existing IOMMU drivers before merging this patch 
>> series...
> 
> Please pardon the question, but has this patch series been tested on 
> ARM32 ?
> 
> When the device is probed the arch_setup_dma_ops() function is called. 
> It sets
> the device's dma_ops and the mapping (in __arm_iommu_attach_device()). 
> If
> probe is deferred, arch_teardown_dma_ops() is called which in turn 
> calls
> arch_teardown_dma_ops(). This removes the mapping but doesn't touch the
> dma_ops. The next time the device is probed, arch_setup_dma_ops() bails 
> out
> immediately as the dma_ops are already set, leaving us with a device 
> bound to
> IOMMU operations but with no mapping. This oopses later as soon as the 
> kernel
> tries to map memory for the device through the IOMMU.

Resetting the dma_ops for arm32 was added in this patch [1], which I 
missed
to send in the original series, but now have added to Russell's patch 
tracking
system.

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9434105/

Regards,
  Sricharan

> 
> I might be missing something obvious, but I don't see how this can 
> work.
> 
>> >>> This can be fixed by either:
>> >>>   - Disabling CONFIG_IPMMU_VMSA, or
>> >>>   - Reverting commit 7b07cbefb68d486f (but keeping "int ret = 0;").
>> >>>
>> >>> Note that this was a bit hard to investigate, as R-Car Gen3 support
>> >>> wasn't upstreamed yet, so bisection pointed to a merge commit.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel