From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F52C433E0 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 15:40:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCEB920663 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 15:40:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="fo1rq93G" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BCEB920663 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:42104 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jqIMr-0006Oz-0f for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:40:17 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42826) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jqILw-0004va-Me for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:39:20 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:52230) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jqILu-0003KJ-3C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:39:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1593531557; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=RfDTnZyAnMKxrAwhwYFuNYjdOfKdvzDk5jy6V9PyZC4=; b=fo1rq93GGbAYa+PJ0AkeBrEPD53Fjxe1lYNW7VM2ezOByJGB0jUCwkvKqOeOvLZ1Wjvkbh +5EJSI9xlY8CjfkTlszOL/bUpvT6OcJ3acY5l6MOLT4gC1l/SjTvQZsjTgSH7grPbTrOMj f4RXJOT6f2EeVWYLIcjSuldJMdR/Ego= Received: from mail-qv1-f71.google.com (mail-qv1-f71.google.com [209.85.219.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-15-48C3fXQtNKyvTj5rVWIJjw-1; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:39:14 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 48C3fXQtNKyvTj5rVWIJjw-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f71.google.com with SMTP id m18so1048403qvt.8 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 08:39:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=RfDTnZyAnMKxrAwhwYFuNYjdOfKdvzDk5jy6V9PyZC4=; b=hde19Eeev6BNTdBJw8mWUmxp/rI/x4H6/1GU972ckEhIRKtL7+Rh+VDuTpw5wIMlmq MfSYMHapsYg6AuddHtYLShWxYj3Qtj06Hhj9B0a6T4RGNK8OK+6XlSquQxT7oAqNyF1Q duzce/4mujGAJ/9QxyitJi59m/oMuGxi0Ax1CSBTXyRU1TKMNH0qlfmTUreoWYXZRirO WGBfmUPUvyB3IZxS234+w18cBLRPdiPLSQ0ZRiHPprKeem0dELFMfC/76CjCu9hsnBVL wJXoFfJtynQhZjWml9Z2a4ZIHDAb5Xc6UW8p/XEMNjLIg337OSRCjS9bL1YLlqlwxRMH j0/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530c8YeE8RbaLLdjjvYTjkobFO+Pc5gQsf6uo6D3zjB1YDOP2t3G x0reun2oylE/iD2mUKYx8lTjuC8DKs/1HzDjT9APd/TIEAIDPWZa05GKk+ZFB96kbCByKzOu7m3 xij2YLIPwtyo8anE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1385:: with SMTP id k5mr19835417qki.148.1593531554161; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 08:39:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw7pPgUKCwc1gJRfuL+VDoCP5hXui91OFR6cxvTos4qcKPFpFv1xfhm/2HVA+AxEES49aqRpw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1385:: with SMTP id k5mr19835387qki.148.1593531553884; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 08:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xz-x1 ([2607:9880:19c0:32::2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z18sm3481813qta.51.2020.06.30.08.39.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 08:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:39:11 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: Jason Wang Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/1] memory: Delete assertion in memory_region_unregister_iommu_notifier Message-ID: <20200630153911.GD3138@xz-x1> References: <20200626064122.9252-1-eperezma@redhat.com> <20200626064122.9252-2-eperezma@redhat.com> <20200626212917.GD175520@xz-x1> <8cf25190-53e6-8cbb-372b-e3d4ec714dc5@redhat.com> <20200628144746.GA239443@xz-x1> <54d2cdfd-97b8-9e1d-a607-d7a5e96be3a1@redhat.com> <20200629133403.GA266532@xz-x1> <2589d0e9-cc5b-a4df-8790-189b49f1a40e@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2589d0e9-cc5b-a4df-8790-189b49f1a40e@redhat.com> Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=peterx@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=207.211.31.81; envelope-from=peterx@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/30 02:00:02 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -30 X-Spam_score: -3.1 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Maydell , Yan Zhao , Juan Quintela , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eugenio =?utf-8?B?UMOpcmV6?= , Eric Auger , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 10:41:10AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > /* According to ATS spec table 2.4: > > * S = 0, bits 15:12 = xxxx range size: 4K > > * S = 1, bits 15:12 = xxx0 range size: 8K > > * S = 1, bits 15:12 = xx01 range size: 16K > > * S = 1, bits 15:12 = x011 range size: 32K > > * S = 1, bits 15:12 = 0111 range size: 64K > > * ... > > */ > > > Right, but the comment is probably misleading here, since it's for the PCI-E > transaction between IOMMU and device not for the device IOTLB invalidation > descriptor. > > For device IOTLB invalidation descriptor, spec allows a [0, ~0ULL] > invalidation: > > " > > 6.5.2.5 Device-TLB Invalidate Descriptor > > ... > > Size (S): The size field indicates the number of consecutive pages targeted > by this invalidation > request. If S field is zero, a single page at page address specified by > Address [63:12] is requested > to be invalidated. If S field is Set, the least significant bit in the > Address field with value 0b > indicates the invalidation address range. For example, if S field is Set and > Address[12] is Clear, it > indicates an 8KB invalidation address range with base address in Address > [63:13]. If S field and > Address[12] is Set and bit 13 is Clear, it indicates a 16KB invalidation > address range with base > address in Address [63:14], etc. > > " > > So if we receive an address whose [63] is 0 and the rest is all 1, it's then > a [0, ~0ULL] invalidation. Yes. I think invalidating the whole range is always fine. It's still not arbitrary, right? E.g., we can't even invalidate (0x1000, 0x3000) with device-iotlb because of the address mask, not to say sub-pages. > > > > > > > > > > > > How about just convert to use a range [start, end] for any notifier and move > > > > > the checks (e.g the assert) into the actual notifier implemented (vhost or > > > > > vfio)? > > > > IOMMUTLBEntry itself is the abstraction layer of TLB entry. Hardware TLB entry > > > > is definitely not arbitrary range either (because AFAICT the hardware should > > > > only cache PFN rather than address, so at least PAGE_SIZE aligned). > > > > Introducing this flag will already make this trickier just to avoid introducing > > > > another similar struct to IOMMUTLBEntry, but I really don't want to make it a > > > > default option... Not to mention I probably have no reason to urge the rest > > > > iommu notifier users (tcg, vfio) to change their existing good code to suite > > > > any of the backend who can cooperate with arbitrary address ranges... > > > > > > Ok, so it looks like we need a dedicated notifiers to device IOTLB. > > Or we can also make a new flag for device iotlb just like current UNMAP? Then > > we replace the vhost type from UNMAP to DEVICE_IOTLB. But IMHO using the > > ARBITRARY_LENGTH flag would work in a similar way. DEVICE_IOTLB flag could > > also allow virtio/vhost to only receive one invalidation (now IIUC it'll > > receive both iotlb and device-iotlb for unmapping a page when ats=on), but then > > ats=on will be a must and it could break some old (misconfiged) qemu because > > afaict previously virtio/vhost could even work with vIOMMU (accidentally) even > > without ats=on. > > > That's a bug and I don't think we need to workaround mis-configurated qemu > :) IMHO it depends on the strictness we want on the qemu cmdline API. :) We should at least check libvirt to make sure it's using ats=on always, then I agree maybe we can avoid considering the rest... Thanks, -- Peter Xu