From: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>, <iommu@lists.linux.dev>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] iommu/vt-d: Remove caching mode check before device TLB flush
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:30:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7e78917f-f84c-4e98-a612-73b8013ae367@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240410055823.264501-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
On 2024/4/10 13:58, Lu Baolu wrote:
> The Caching Mode (CM) of the Intel IOMMU indicates if the hardware
> implementation caches not-present or erroneous translation-structure
> entries except the first-stage translation. The caching mode is
> irrelevant to the device TLB , therefore there is no need to check
> it before a device TLB invalidation operation.
>
> iommu_flush_iotlb_psi() is called in map and unmap paths. The caching
> mode check before device TLB invalidation will cause device TLB
> invalidation always issued if IOMMU is not running in caching mode.
> This is wrong and causes unnecessary performance overhead.
I don't think the original code is wrong. As I replied before, if CM==0,
the iommu_flush_iotlb_psi() is only called in unmap path, in which the
@map is false. [1] The reason to make the change is to make the logic
simpler. :)
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/ac7fdf0f-ecb9-415f-9c1b-600536b92ca5@intel.com/
> The removal of caching mode check in intel_flush_iotlb_all() doesn't
> impact anything no matter the IOMMU is working in caching mode or not.
> Commit <29b32839725f> ("iommu/vt-d: Do not use flush-queue when
> caching-mode is on") has already disabled flush-queue for caching mode,
> hence caching mode will never call intel_flush_iotlb_all().
>
> Fixes: bf92df30df90 ("intel-iommu: Only avoid flushing device IOTLB for domain ID 0 in caching mode")
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 9 ++-------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> Change log:
>
> v2:
> - Squash two patches into a single one.
> - No functionality changes.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20240407144232.190355-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com/
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
> index 50eb9aed47cc..681789b1258d 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
> @@ -1501,11 +1501,7 @@ static void iommu_flush_iotlb_psi(struct intel_iommu *iommu,
> else
> __iommu_flush_iotlb_psi(iommu, did, pfn, pages, ih);
>
> - /*
> - * In caching mode, changes of pages from non-present to present require
> - * flush. However, device IOTLB doesn't need to be flushed in this case.
> - */
> - if (!cap_caching_mode(iommu->cap) || !map)
> + if (!map)
> iommu_flush_dev_iotlb(domain, addr, mask);
> }
>
> @@ -1579,8 +1575,7 @@ static void intel_flush_iotlb_all(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> iommu->flush.flush_iotlb(iommu, did, 0, 0,
> DMA_TLB_DSI_FLUSH);
>
> - if (!cap_caching_mode(iommu->cap))
> - iommu_flush_dev_iotlb(dmar_domain, 0, MAX_AGAW_PFN_WIDTH);
> + iommu_flush_dev_iotlb(dmar_domain, 0, MAX_AGAW_PFN_WIDTH);
why not one more step to move it out of the iommu_array loop? There is
no more reason to keep it in the loop.
> }
>
> if (dmar_domain->nested_parent)
--
Regards,
Yi Liu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-10 6:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-10 5:58 Lu Baolu
2024-04-10 6:14 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-04-10 6:30 ` Yi Liu [this message]
2024-04-10 8:02 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-10 9:14 ` Yi Liu
2024-04-10 10:38 ` Baolu Lu
2024-04-12 9:34 ` Yi Liu
2024-04-11 13:13 ` Robin Murphy
2024-04-11 13:48 ` 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=7e78917f-f84c-4e98-a612-73b8013ae367@intel.com \
--to=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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®