mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] iommu/vt-d: Move PCI PASID enablement to probe path
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:34:50 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3631c0ca-4c8d-4cef-aa40-13e3acd22123@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <511f140b-2792-47b0-b366-cbbad6e80239@intel.com>

On 2024/8/19 11:14, Yi Liu wrote:
> On 2024/8/16 18:49, Lu Baolu wrote:
>> Currently, PCI PASID is enabled alongside PCI ATS when an iommu domain is
>> attached to the device and disabled when the device transitions to block
>> translation mode. This approach is inappropriate as PCI PASID is a device
>> feature independent of the type of the attached domain.
>>
>> Enable PCI PASID during the IOMMU device probe and disables it during the
>> release path.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 27 +++++++++++++--------------
>>   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> index 9ff8b83c19a3..5a8080c71b04 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> @@ -1322,15 +1322,6 @@ static void iommu_enable_pci_caps(struct 
>> device_domain_info *info)
>>           return;
>>       pdev = to_pci_dev(info->dev);
>> -
>> -    /* The PCIe spec, in its wisdom, declares that the behaviour of
>> -       the device if you enable PASID support after ATS support is
>> -       undefined. So always enable PASID support on devices which
>> -       have it, even if we can't yet know if we're ever going to
>> -       use it. */
>> -    if (info->pasid_supported && !pci_enable_pasid(pdev, 
>> info->pasid_supported & ~1))
>> -        info->pasid_enabled = 1;
>> -
>>       if (info->ats_supported && pci_ats_page_aligned(pdev) &&
>>           !pci_enable_ats(pdev, VTD_PAGE_SHIFT)) {
>>           info->ats_enabled = 1;
>> @@ -1352,11 +1343,6 @@ static void iommu_disable_pci_caps(struct 
>> device_domain_info *info)
>>           info->ats_enabled = 0;
>>           domain_update_iotlb(info->domain);
>>       }
>> -
>> -    if (info->pasid_enabled) {
>> -        pci_disable_pasid(pdev);
>> -        info->pasid_enabled = 0;
>> -    }
>>   }
>>   static void intel_flush_iotlb_all(struct iommu_domain *domain)
>> @@ -4110,6 +4096,16 @@ static struct iommu_device 
>> *intel_iommu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
>>           }
>>       }
>> +    /*
>> +     * The PCIe spec, in its wisdom, declares that the behaviour of the
>> +     * device is undefined if you enable PASID support after ATS 
>> support.
>> +     * So always enable PASID support on devices which have it, even if
>> +     * we can't yet know if we're ever going to use it.
>> +     */
>> +    if (info->pasid_supported &&
>> +        !pci_enable_pasid(pdev, info->pasid_supported & ~1))
>> +        info->pasid_enabled = 1;
>> +
>>       intel_iommu_debugfs_create_dev(info);
>>       return &iommu->iommu;
>> @@ -4128,6 +4124,9 @@ static void intel_iommu_release_device(struct 
>> device *dev)
>>       struct device_domain_info *info = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
>>       struct intel_iommu *iommu = info->iommu;
>> +    if (info->pasid_enabled)
>> +        pci_disable_pasid(to_pci_dev(dev));
>> +
> 
> would it make sense to move this behind the
> intel_iommu_debugfs_remove_dev(info)? This seems to mirror the order of the
> intel_iommu_probe_device(). Or you may set info->pasid_enabled to 0 in case
> of any code uses it before info is freed if keeping this order. Otherwise,
> lgtm. thanks for the quick action. 🙂

The info->pasid_enabled change should not impact the behavior of
intel_iommu_debugfs_remove_dev(), and I didn't find any issue during my
test.

Anyway, to make it more consistent with previous behavior, maybe I could
move the part where we turn on/off pasid to the end of the probe and the
start of the release.

Additional change likes below?

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
index 5a8080c71b04..76b317f1d1de 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
@@ -4096,6 +4096,8 @@ static struct iommu_device 
*intel_iommu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
                 }
         }

+       intel_iommu_debugfs_create_dev(info);
+
         /*
          * The PCIe spec, in its wisdom, declares that the behaviour of the
          * device is undefined if you enable PASID support after ATS 
support.
@@ -4106,8 +4108,6 @@ static struct iommu_device 
*intel_iommu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
             !pci_enable_pasid(pdev, info->pasid_supported & ~1))
                 info->pasid_enabled = 1;

-       intel_iommu_debugfs_create_dev(info);
-
         return &iommu->iommu;
  free_table:
         intel_pasid_free_table(dev);

Thanks,
baolu

  reply	other threads:[~2024-08-19  3:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-16 10:49 Lu Baolu
2024-08-16 12:16 ` Vasant Hegde
2024-08-16 13:09   ` Baolu Lu
2024-08-16 13:31     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-19  6:34     ` Vasant Hegde
2024-08-19  7:09       ` Baolu Lu
2024-08-19  7:11         ` Baolu Lu
2024-08-19 12:34         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-20  4:10           ` Baolu Lu
2024-08-20  8:30             ` Vasant Hegde
2024-08-20  8:55               ` Yi Liu
2024-08-20 13:52                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-20 13:51               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-08-26  9:11                 ` Vasant Hegde
2024-08-19  7:32       ` Yi Liu
2024-08-19  3:14 ` Yi Liu
2024-08-19  3:34   ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2024-08-19  4:51     ` Yi Liu
2024-08-19  5:15       ` Baolu Lu

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=3631c0ca-4c8d-4cef-aa40-13e3acd22123@linux.intel.com \
    --to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.l.liu@intel.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