From: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:25:10 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2203021709470.3261@ubuntu-linux-20-04-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220302081500.GB23075@lst.de>
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 06:55:47PM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Unrelated to this specific patch series: now that I think about it, if
> > io_tlb_default_mem.nslabs is already allocated by the time xen_mm_init
> > is called, wouldn't we potentially have an issue with the GFP flags used
> > for the earlier allocation (e.g. GFP_DMA32 not used)? Maybe something
> > for another day.
>
> swiotlb_init allocates low memory from meblock, which is roughly
> equivalent to GFP_DMA allocations, so we'll be fine.
>
> > > @@ -143,10 +141,15 @@ static int __init xen_mm_init(void)
> > > if (!xen_swiotlb_detect())
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > - rc = xen_swiotlb_init();
> > > /* we can work with the default swiotlb */
> > > - if (rc < 0 && rc != -EEXIST)
> > > - return rc;
> > > + if (!io_tlb_default_mem.nslabs) {
> > > + if (!xen_initial_domain())
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > I don't think we need this xen_initial_domain() check. It is all
> > already sorted out by the xen_swiotlb_detect() check above.
>
> Is it?
>
> static inline int xen_swiotlb_detect(void)
> {
> if (!xen_domain())
> return 0;
> if (xen_feature(XENFEAT_direct_mapped))
> return 1;
> /* legacy case */
> if (!xen_feature(XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped) && xen_initial_domain())
> return 1;
> return 0;
> }
It used to be that we had a
if (!xen_initial_domain())
return -EINVAL;
check in the initialization of swiotlb-xen on ARM. Then we replaced it
with the more sophisticated xen_swiotlb_detect().
The reason is that swiotlb-xen on ARM relies on Dom0 being 1:1 mapped
(guest physical addresses == physical addresses). Recent changes in Xen
allowed also DomUs to be 1:1 mapped. Changes still under discussion will
allow Dom0 not to be 1:1 mapped.
So, before all the Xen-side changes, knowing what was going to happen, I
introduced a clearer interface: XENFEAT_direct_mapped and
XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped tell us whether the guest (Linux) is 1:1
mapped or not. If it is 1:1 mapped then Linux can take advantage of
swiotlb-xen. Now xen_swiotlb_detect() returns true if Linux is 1:1
mapped.
Then of course there is the legacy case. That's taken care of by:
if (!xen_feature(XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped) && xen_initial_domain())
return 1;
The intention is to say that if
XENFEAT_direct_mapped/XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped are not present, then
use xen_initial_domain() like we did before.
So if xen_swiotlb_detect() returns true we know that Linux is either
dom0 (xen_initial_domain() == true) or we have very good reasons to
think we should initialize swiotlb-xen anyway
(xen_feature(XENFEAT_direct_mapped) == true).
> I think I'd keep it as-is for now, as my planned next step would be to
> fold xen-swiotlb into swiotlb entirely.
Thinking more about it we actually need to drop the xen_initial_domain()
check otherwise some cases won't be functional (Dom0 not 1:1 mapped, or
DomU 1:1 mapped).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-03 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-01 10:52 cleanup swiotlb initialization v4 Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 01/12] dma-direct: use is_swiotlb_active in dma_direct_map_page Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 02/12] swiotlb: make swiotlb_exit a no-op if SWIOTLB_FORCE is set Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 03/12] swiotlb: simplify swiotlb_max_segment Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 04/12] swiotlb: rename swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 05/12] swiotlb: pass a gfp_mask argument to swiotlb_init_late Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 06/12] MIPS/octeon: use swiotlb_init instead of open coding it Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 07/12] x86: remove the IOMMU table infrastructure Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 08/12] x86: centralize setting SWIOTLB_FORCE when guest memory encryption is enabled Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 09/12] swiotlb: make the swiotlb_init interface more useful Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 10/12] swiotlb: add a SWIOTLB_ANY flag to lift the low memory restriction Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini [this message]
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 12/12] x86: remove cruft from <asm/dma-mapping.h> Christoph Hellwig
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=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2203021709470.3261@ubuntu-linux-20-04-desktop \
--to=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/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).