linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Cc: joro@8bytes.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	sherry.hurwitz@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PART2 PATCH v4 07/11] iommu/amd: Introduce amd_iommu_update_ga()
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 15:40:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160714134055.GD16130@potion> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <578757A8.3000200@amd.com>

2016-07-14 16:13+0700, Suravee Suthikulpanit:
> On 7/13/16 21:14, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> 2016-07-13 08:20-0500, Suravee Suthikulpanit:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
>> > @@ -4461,4 +4461,69 @@ int amd_iommu_create_irq_domain(struct amd_iommu *iommu)
>> > +int amd_iommu_update_ga(u32 vcpu_id, u32 cpu, u32 vm_id,
>> > +			u64 base, bool is_run)
>> 
>> |2016-07-13 15:49+0700, Suravee Suthikulpanit:
>> |> On 07/12/2016 01:59 AM, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> |>> Not just in this function does the interface between svm and iommu split
>> |>> ga_tag into its two components (vcpu_id and ga_tag), but it seems that
>> |>> the combined value could always be used instead ...
>> |>> Is there an advantage to passing two values?
>> |>
>> |> Here, the amd_iommu_update_ga() takes the two separate value for input
>> |> parameters. Mainly the ga_tag (which is really the vm_id) and vcpu_id. This
>> |> allow IOMMU driver to decide how to encode the GATAG to be programmed into
>> |> the IRTE. Currently, the actual GATAG is a 16-bit value, <vm_id><vcpu_id>.
>> |> This keeps the interface independent from how we encode the GATAG.
>> 
>> I was thinking about making the IOMMU unaware how SVM or other Linux
>> hypervisors use the ga_tag, i.e. passing the final u32 ga_tag.
>> For example 32 bit hypervisor doesn't need to use lookup, because any
>> pointer can used as the ga_tag directly.
> 
> Ahh....... (w/ a big light bulb)
> I get your point now. Let's just have SVM (or other hypervisor) define what
> the tag should be and just pass-on the value to IOMMU. IOMMU can just simply
> use this w/o knowing what it is.  Sorry, I'm slow :)

That is what I meant, but misunderstanding is a product of both
participants.  I didn't write it clearly on the first try.

>> > +		hash_for_each_possible(iommu->gatag_ir_hash, ir_data, hnode,
>> > +				       AMD_IOMMU_GATAG(vm_id, vcpu_id)) {
>> > +			struct irte_ga *irte = (struct irte_ga *) ir_data->entry;
>> 
>> |>> (The ga_tag check is missing here too.)
>> |>
>> |> Here, the intention is to update all interrupt remapping entries in the
>> |> bucket w/ the same GATAG (i.e. vm_id + vcpu_id), where GATAG =
>> |> AMD_IOMMU_GATAG(vm_id, vcpu_id).
>> 
>> Which is why you need to check that
>>    AMD_IOMMU_GATAG(vm_id, vcpu_id) == entry->fields_vapic.ga_tag
>> 
>> The hashing function can map two different vm_id + vcpu_id to the same
>> bucket and hash_for_each_possible() would return both of them, but only
>> one belongs to the VCPU that we want to update.
>> 
>> (And shouldn't there be only one match?)
> 
> Actually, with your suggestion above, the hask key would be (vm_id &
> 0x3FFFFF << 8)| (vcpu_id & 0xFF). So, it should be unique for each vcpu of
> each vm, or am I still missing something?

[Reply in the followup mail.]

> Also, since we will not be passing the vmid and vcpuid as separate value,
> and just passing the (u32)ga_tag, we would not be able to do the check you
> suggested here.

There will be the u32 ga_tag argument, so you would still do
  ga_tag == entry->fields_vapic.ga_tag

Because even if the ga_tag is unique for every vcpu, the hash table will
mix various vcpus into one bucket and you need to filter them.

>> > +			update_irte_ga((struct irte_ga *)ir_data->ref,
>> > +					ir_data->irq_2_irte.devid,
>> > +					base, cpu, is_run);
>> 
>> |>> (The lookup leading up to here is avoidable -- svm, the caller, has the
>> |>>   ability to map ga_tag into irte/ir_data directly with a pointer.
> 
> I'm not sure about this optimization to avoid look up.
> 
> The struct amd_ir_data is part of the IOMMU driver, and the SVM knows
> nothing about it. I don't think it would be able to find out the pointer to
> amd_ir_data/irte.

Yeah, SVM would store it in a "void *" pointer, because it doesn't need
to know anything else, but you still need to retrieve it from IOMMU,
which could be done through vcpu_info argument to
amd_ir_set_vcpu_affinity().

(I am not sure if it doesn't breach isolation of IOMMU, so we might not
 want to do it in any case ...)

> Also, with the current design, each ga_tag can be mapped to different irte
> since there could be multiple interrupts targeting a particular cpu. Here,
> we would want to update all of the IRTEs with the same ga_tag.

True, that design is good.  SVM would need a list of pointers for each
vcpu to cope with it ...

>> |>>   I'm not sure if the lookup is slow enough to pardon optimization, but
>> |>>   it might make the code simpler as well.)
>> |>
>> |> I might have mislead you up to this point. Not sure if the assumption here
>> |> still hold with my explanation above. Sorry for confusion.
>> 
>> SVM configures IOMMU with ga_tag, so IOMMU could return the pointer to
>> ir_data/irte that was just configured.
> 
> Also, IIUC, you want to use the pointer to ir_data/irte as the ga_tag value.
> The issue would be ga_tag is a 32-bit value, and this would not work with
> 64-bit address.

I mean something slightly different.  Instead of passing ga_tag into
amd_iommu_update_ga(), just pass void * of whatever IOMMU provided back
when SVM configured the interrupt.  ga_tag will never come into play.

(The vcpu lookup from ga_tag is necessary, when processing the queue of
 undelivered interrupts.  ir_data lookup can be avoided.)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-07-14 13:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-13 13:20 [PART2 PATCH v4 00/11] iommu/AMD: Introduce IOMMU AVIC support Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 01/11] iommu/amd: Detect and enable guest vAPIC support Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 02/11] iommu/amd: Move and introduce new IRTE-related unions and structures Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 03/11] iommu/amd: Introduce interrupt remapping ops structure Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 04/11] iommu/amd: Add support for multiple IRTE formats Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 05/11] iommu/amd: Detect and initialize guest vAPIC log Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-20  7:15   ` [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 06/11] iommu/amd: Adding GALOG interrupt handler Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 07/11] iommu/amd: Introduce amd_iommu_update_ga() Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 14:14   ` Radim Krčmář
2016-07-14  9:13     ` Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-14  9:33       ` Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-14 13:45         ` Radim Krčmář
2016-07-14 13:40       ` Radim Krčmář [this message]
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 08/11] iommu/amd: Implements irq_set_vcpu_affinity() hook to setup vapic mode for pass-through devices Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 09/11] iommu/amd: Enable vAPIC interrupt remapping mode by default Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 10/11] svm: Introduce AMD IOMMU avic_ga_log_notifier Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-13 14:29   ` Radim Krčmář
2016-07-14  9:43     ` Suravee Suthikulpanit
2016-07-14 13:52       ` Radim Krčmář
2016-07-13 13:20 ` [PART2 PATCH v4 11/11] svm: Implements update_pi_irte hook to setup posted interrupt Suravee Suthikulpanit

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=20160714134055.GD16130@potion \
    --to=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=sherry.hurwitz@amd.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).