From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: LinuxArm <linuxarm@huawei.com>, Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Libin <huawei.libin@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] iommu/io-pgtable-arm: add support for non-strict mode
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 11:54:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <788428ef-28b8-e5f2-b519-44b206179b89@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1533558424-16748-4-git-send-email-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
On 06/08/18 13:27, Zhen Lei wrote:
> To support the non-strict mode, now we only tlbi and sync for the strict
> mode. But for the non-leaf case, always follow strict mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
> drivers/iommu/io-pgtable.h | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
> index 010a254..bb61bef 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
> @@ -292,7 +292,7 @@ static void __arm_lpae_set_pte(arm_lpae_iopte *ptep, arm_lpae_iopte pte,
>
> static size_t __arm_lpae_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> unsigned long iova, size_t size, int lvl,
> - arm_lpae_iopte *ptep);
> + arm_lpae_iopte *ptep, bool strict);
>
> static void __arm_lpae_init_pte(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> phys_addr_t paddr, arm_lpae_iopte prot,
> @@ -319,6 +319,7 @@ static int arm_lpae_init_pte(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> arm_lpae_iopte prot, int lvl,
> arm_lpae_iopte *ptep)
> {
> + size_t unmapped;
> arm_lpae_iopte pte = *ptep;
>
> if (iopte_leaf(pte, lvl)) {
> @@ -334,7 +335,8 @@ static int arm_lpae_init_pte(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> size_t sz = ARM_LPAE_BLOCK_SIZE(lvl, data);
>
> tblp = ptep - ARM_LPAE_LVL_IDX(iova, lvl, data);
> - if (WARN_ON(__arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, sz, lvl, tblp) != sz))
> + unmapped = __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, sz, lvl, tblp, true);
> + if (WARN_ON(unmapped != sz))
What's the extra local variable for?
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> @@ -576,15 +578,17 @@ static size_t arm_lpae_split_blk_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> }
>
> if (unmap_idx < 0)
> - return __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, size, lvl, tablep);
> + return __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, size, lvl, tablep, true);
>
> io_pgtable_tlb_add_flush(&data->iop, iova, size, size, true);
> + io_pgtable_tlb_sync(&data->iop);
> +
> return size;
> }
>
> static size_t __arm_lpae_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> unsigned long iova, size_t size, int lvl,
> - arm_lpae_iopte *ptep)
> + arm_lpae_iopte *ptep, bool strict)
> {
> arm_lpae_iopte pte;
> struct io_pgtable *iop = &data->iop;
> @@ -609,7 +613,7 @@ static size_t __arm_lpae_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
> io_pgtable_tlb_sync(iop);
> ptep = iopte_deref(pte, data);
> __arm_lpae_free_pgtable(data, lvl + 1, ptep);
> - } else {
> + } else if (strict) {
Since this is the only place we ever actually evaluate "strict", can't
we just test iop->cfg.quirks directly at this point instead of playing
pass-the-parcel with the extra argument?
Robin.
> io_pgtable_tlb_add_flush(iop, iova, size, size, true);
> }
>
> @@ -625,12 +629,13 @@ static size_t __arm_lpae_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
>
> /* Keep on walkin' */
> ptep = iopte_deref(pte, data);
> - return __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, size, lvl + 1, ptep);
> + return __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, size, lvl + 1, ptep, strict);
> }
>
> static size_t arm_lpae_unmap(struct io_pgtable_ops *ops, unsigned long iova,
> size_t size)
> {
> + bool strict;
> struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data = io_pgtable_ops_to_data(ops);
> arm_lpae_iopte *ptep = data->pgd;
> int lvl = ARM_LPAE_START_LVL(data);
> @@ -638,7 +643,9 @@ static size_t arm_lpae_unmap(struct io_pgtable_ops *ops, unsigned long iova,
> if (WARN_ON(iova >= (1ULL << data->iop.cfg.ias)))
> return 0;
>
> - return __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, size, lvl, ptep);
> + strict = !(data->iop.cfg.quirks & IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT);
> +
> + return __arm_lpae_unmap(data, iova, size, lvl, ptep, strict);
> }
>
> static phys_addr_t arm_lpae_iova_to_phys(struct io_pgtable_ops *ops,
> @@ -771,7 +778,8 @@ static void arm_lpae_restrict_pgsizes(struct io_pgtable_cfg *cfg)
> u64 reg;
> struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data;
>
> - if (cfg->quirks & ~(IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_ARM_NS | IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NO_DMA))
> + if (cfg->quirks & ~(IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_ARM_NS | IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NO_DMA |
> + IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT))
> return NULL;
>
> data = arm_lpae_alloc_pgtable(cfg);
> @@ -863,7 +871,8 @@ static void arm_lpae_restrict_pgsizes(struct io_pgtable_cfg *cfg)
> struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data;
>
> /* The NS quirk doesn't apply at stage 2 */
> - if (cfg->quirks & ~IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NO_DMA)
> + if (cfg->quirks & ~(IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NO_DMA |
> + IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT))
> return NULL;
>
> data = arm_lpae_alloc_pgtable(cfg);
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable.h b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable.h
> index 2df7909..beb14a3 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable.h
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable.h
> @@ -71,12 +71,15 @@ struct io_pgtable_cfg {
> * be accessed by a fully cache-coherent IOMMU or CPU (e.g. for a
> * software-emulated IOMMU), such that pagetable updates need not
> * be treated as explicit DMA data.
> + * IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT: Put off TLBs invalidation and release
> + * memory first.
> */
> #define IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_ARM_NS BIT(0)
> #define IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NO_PERMS BIT(1)
> #define IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_TLBI_ON_MAP BIT(2)
> #define IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_ARM_MTK_4GB BIT(3)
> #define IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NO_DMA BIT(4)
> + #define IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT BIT(5)
> unsigned long quirks;
> unsigned long pgsize_bitmap;
> unsigned int ias;
> --
> 1.8.3
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-09 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-06 12:26 [PATCH v4 0/5] add non-strict mode support for arm-smmu-v3 Zhen Lei
2018-08-06 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: fix the implementation of flush_iotlb_all hook Zhen Lei
2018-08-09 10:25 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] iommu/dma: add support for non-strict mode Zhen Lei
2018-08-09 10:46 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-09 11:01 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2018-08-06 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] iommu/io-pgtable-arm: " Zhen Lei
2018-08-09 10:54 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2018-08-09 11:20 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2018-08-06 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: " Zhen Lei
2018-08-09 11:06 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-14 1:49 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2018-08-06 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: add bootup option "arm_iommu" Zhen Lei
2018-08-09 11:08 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-13 7:50 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
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=788428ef-28b8-e5f2-b519-44b206179b89@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=huawei.libin@huawei.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®