From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
mingo@redhat.com, fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp,
airlied@linux.ie
Subject: Re: IOMMU and graphics cards
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:28:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1240932530.2567.91.camel@macbook.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090428150531.GZ17438@amd.com>
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 17:05 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> as I have seen the VT-d code implements a workaround for broken graphics
> card drivers. What it does, when enabled, is giving each grahics device
> direct access to all physical memory. I really don't like to implement
> this but a similar workaround for the AMD IOMMU seems to be necessary.
> The biggest problem here is that this kind of workaround disables device
> isolation for graphics cards. Device isolation is the main reason for
> using an IOMMU in an unvirtualized environment. So if this workaround is
> enabled it is as good as disable the IOMMU at all.
For that device, yes. The IOMMU still catches errors from _other_
devices, of course.
But I agree that it's a crap thing to have to do, and there are probably
a number of ways we could make it slightly less crap. For a start, we
could at least refrain from mapping the kernel text -- the card has no
business DMAing there, whatever happens.
> Thats why I think a kernel compile option for this workaround is not
> sufficient. Distributors will probably enable this in their kernels
> which also disables device isolation even if the user don't want to use
> these broken drivers.
Yes, that makes a lot of sense.
Is the reason you're doing this actually because of broken drivers? Or
just because of the performance implications? I've heard both cited as
reasons for the 1:1 mapping... and if it's mostly the former, then
perhaps the best way for me to help you is to stop enabling the option
in Fedora (rawhide, at least), so that the buggy drivers get _fixed_ and
you don't get stuck with "it works on Intel, why can't you make it
work?" reports?
> I think we should change that and provide a better way which allows to
> enable this workaround only if it is required (and it should be
> transparent to the user which IOMMU is built into the system).
> We have several options to do this:
>
> * Implement a kernel command line option to enable/disable the
> workaround (what should be default?)
> * Use the IOMMU-API and write a kernel module which creates a
> direct mapped protection domain and assigns the graphics
> cards to it (need to be done carefully to not break graphics
> drivers which do everything right and use the DMA-API)
> * Any other great idea?
>
> So what do you (and all the others reading this :-) think? I would
> prefer the way of implementing a module but there may also be reasons
> against this. I would like this to be disussed before I implement the
> workaround for the AMD IOMMU.
I think I also prefer your second option. I don't like having this as a
hack in the IOMMU code.
--
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-28 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-28 15:05 Joerg Roedel
2009-04-28 15:28 ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2009-04-28 16:04 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-05-07 7:47 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2009-05-07 10:01 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-05-07 10:22 ` David Woodhouse
2009-05-07 10:42 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2009-05-07 12:15 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-05-07 12:59 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2009-05-07 14:37 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-05-07 17:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-07 18:36 ` David Miller
2009-05-08 9:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-07-06 12:26 ` David Woodhouse
2009-07-06 13:11 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-07-06 14:18 ` David Woodhouse
2009-07-06 21:35 ` Dave Airlie
2009-07-06 22:00 ` Dave Airlie
2009-07-07 8:54 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-07-07 15:24 ` Duran, Leo
2009-07-07 15:33 ` Duran, Leo
2009-07-07 15:36 ` David Woodhouse
2009-07-07 8:59 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-07-07 9:16 ` David Woodhouse
2009-07-07 9:05 ` David Woodhouse
2009-05-07 10:23 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2009-05-07 11:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-07 11:14 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2009-05-07 11:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-07 12:00 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-05-07 10:55 ` Ingo Molnar
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=1240932530.2567.91.camel@macbook.infradead.org \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joerg.roedel@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.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
Powered by JetHome