On 03/04/2015 03:35 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > (please try to avoid top-posting) > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 06:20:19PM -0800, Mario Smarduch wrote: >> On 03/02/2015 08:31 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> However, my concern with these patches are on two points: >>> >>> 1. It's not a fix-all. We still have the case where the guest expects >>> the behavior of device memory (for strong ordering for example) on a RAM >>> region, which we now break. Similiarly this doesn't support the >>> non-coherent DMA to RAM region case. >>> >>> 2. While the code is probably as nice as this kind of stuff gets, it >>> is non-trivial and extremely difficult to debug. The counter-point here >>> is that we may end up handling other stuff at EL2 for performanc reasons >>> in the future. >>> >>> Mainly because of point 1 above, I am leaning to thinking userspace >>> should do the invalidation when it knows it needs to, either through KVM >>> via a memslot flag or through some other syscall mechanism. > > I expressed my concerns as well, I'm definitely against merging this > series. > >> I don't understand how can the CPU handle different cache attributes >> used by QEMU and Guest won't you run into B2.9 checklist? Wouldn't >> cache evictions or cleans wipe out guest updates to same cache >> line(s)? > > "Clean+invalidate" is a safe operation even if the guest accesses the > memory in a cacheable way. But if the guest can update the cache lines, > Qemu should avoid cache maintenance from a performance perspective. > > The guest is either told that the DMA is coherent (via DT properties) or > Qemu deals with (non-)coherency itself. The latter is fully in line with > the B2.9 chapter in the ARM ARM, more precisely point 5: > > If the mismatched attributes for a memory location all assign the same > shareability attribute to the location, any loss of uniprocessor > semantics or coherency within a shareability domain can be avoided by > use of software cache management. > > ... it continues with what kind of cache maintenance is required, > together with: > > A clean and invalidate instruction can be used instead of a clean > instruction, or instead of an invalidate instruction. > Hi Catalin, sorry for the top posting. I'm struggling with QEMU cache maintenance for devices that don't have registers cache line aligned and may be multi-function, for lack of a better one I thought of sp804 that supports two devices with registers covered by one cache line. Wouldn't QEMU cache maintenance of one device have potential to corrupt the second device? These could be used by two guest threads in parallel. I get bullet 2,3 still working on 1st one it will take a while. Thanks, - Mario -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
