Re: Support SVM without PASID

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 08/08/17 01:51, Bob Liu wrote:
> On 2017/8/7 20:52, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> On 07/08/17 13:18, Bob Liu wrote:
>>> On 2017/8/7 18:31, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>>>> On 05/08/17 06:14, valmiki wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> Hi Jean, Thanks a lot, now i understood the flow. From vfio kernel
>>>>> documentation we fill vaddr and iova in struct vfio_iommu_type1_dma_map
>>>>> and pass them to VFIO. But if we use dynamic allocation in application
>>>>> (say malloc), do we need to use dma API to get iova and then call
>>>>> VFIO_IOMMU_MAP ioctl ?
>>>>> If application needs multiple such dynamic allocations, then it need to
>>>>> allocate large chunk and program it via VFIO_IOMMU_MAP ioctl and then
>>>>> manage rest allocations requirements from this buffer ?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, without SVM, the application allocates large buffers, allocates IOVAs
>>>> itself, and maps them with VFIO_IOMMU_MAP. Userspace doesn't rely on the
>>>> DMA API at all, it manages IOVAs as it wants. Sizes passed to
>>>> VFIO_IOMMU_MAP have to be multiples of the MMU or IOMMU page granularity
>>>> (that is at least 4kB), and both iova and vaddr have to be aligned on that
>>>> granularity as well. So malloc isn't really suitable in this case, you'll
>>>> need mmap. The application can then implement a small allocator to manage
>>>> the DMA pool created with VFIO_IOMMU_MAP.
>>>>
>>>> With SVM the application binds its address space to the device, and then
>>>> uses malloc for all DMA buffers, no need for VFIO_IOMMU_MAP.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jean,
>>>
>>> I think there is another way to support SVM without PASID.
>>>
>>> Suppose there is a device in the same SOC-chip, the device access memory through SMMU(using internal bus instead of PCIe)
>>> Once page fault, the device send an event with (vaddr, substreamID) to SMMU, then SMMU triggers an event interrupt.
>>>
>>> In the event interrupt handler, we can implement the same logic as PRI interrupt in your patch.
>>> What do you think about that?
>> What you're describing is the SMMU stall model for platform devices. From
>> the driver perspective it's the same as PRI and PASID (SubstreamID=PASID).
>>
> 
> Indeed!
> 
>> When a stall-capable device accesses unmapped memory, the SMMU parks the
>> transaction and sends an event marked "stall" on the event queue, with a
>> stall tag (STAG, roughly equivalent to PRG Index). The OS handles the
>> fault and sends a CMD_RESUME command with the status and the STAG. Then
>> the SMMU completes the access or terminates it.
>>
>> In a prototype I have, the stall implementation reuses most of the
> 
> Glad to hear that.
> Would you mind to share me the prototype patch?
> 
>> PASID/PRI code. The main difficulty is defining SSID and stall capability
>> in firmware, as there are no standard capability probing for platform
>> devices. Stall-capable devices must be able to wait an indefinite amount
>> of time that their DMA transactions returns, therefore the stall model
>> cannot work with PCI, only some integrated devices.
>>
> 
> I happen to have a board with such devices and like to do the test.
> Will re-post a full version patch upstream once completing the verification.

Cool! You can find the prototype here:
git://linux-arm.org/linux-jpb.git svm/stall

Please let me know if you get anywhere with it, I'd like to get the series
moving again.

Thanks,
Jean



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux