Hi Yi, Vivek,
On 1/13/21 6:56 AM, Liu, Yi L wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
>
>> From: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@xxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 7:06 PM
>>
>> Hi Yi,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 2:51 PM Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Vivek,
>>>
>>>> From: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@xxxxxxx>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 2:50 PM
>>>>
>>>> Hi Yi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:13 PM Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch is added as instead of returning a boolean for
>>>> DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING,
>>>>> iommu_domain_get_attr() should return an iommu_nesting_info
>> handle.
>>>> For
>>>>> now, return an empty nesting info struct for now as true nesting is not
>>>>> yet supported by the SMMUs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: Eric Auger <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Suggested-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> v5 -> v6:
>>>>> *) add review-by from Eric Auger.
>>>>>
>>>>> v4 -> v5:
>>>>> *) address comments from Eric Auger.
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 29
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c | 29
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>> 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>>> b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>>>> index 7196207..016e2e5 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>>>> @@ -3019,6 +3019,32 @@ static struct iommu_group
>>>> *arm_smmu_device_group(struct device *dev)
>>>>> return group;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> +static int arm_smmu_domain_nesting_info(struct
>> arm_smmu_domain
>>>> *smmu_domain,
>>>>> + void *data)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct iommu_nesting_info *info = (struct iommu_nesting_info
>>>> *)data;
>>>>> + unsigned int size;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!info || smmu_domain->stage !=
>> ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED)
>>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + size = sizeof(struct iommu_nesting_info);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * if provided buffer size is smaller than expected, should
>>>>> + * return 0 and also the expected buffer size to caller.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (info->argsz < size) {
>>>>> + info->argsz = size;
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* report an empty iommu_nesting_info for now */
>>>>> + memset(info, 0x0, size);
>>>>> + info->argsz = size;
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> static int arm_smmu_domain_get_attr(struct iommu_domain
>> *domain,
>>>>> enum iommu_attr attr, void *data)
>>>>> {
>>>>> @@ -3028,8 +3054,7 @@ static int
>> arm_smmu_domain_get_attr(struct
>>>> iommu_domain *domain,
>>>>> case IOMMU_DOMAIN_UNMANAGED:
>>>>> switch (attr) {
>>>>> case DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING:
>>>>> - *(int *)data = (smmu_domain->stage ==
>>>> ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED);
>>>>> - return 0;
>>>>> + return
>> arm_smmu_domain_nesting_info(smmu_domain,
>>>> data);
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the patch.
>>>> This would unnecessarily overflow 'data' for any caller that's expecting
>> only
>>>> an int data. Dump from one such issue that I was seeing when testing
>>>> this change along with local kvmtool changes is pasted below [1].
>>>>
>>>> I could get around with the issue by adding another (iommu_attr) -
>>>> DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING_INFO that returns (iommu_nesting_info).
>>>
>>> nice to hear from you. At first, we planned to have a separate iommu_attr
>>> for getting nesting_info. However, we considered there is no existing user
>>> which gets DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING, so we decided to reuse it for iommu
>> nesting
>>> info. Could you share me the code base you are using? If the error you
>>> encountered is due to this change, so there should be a place which gets
>>> DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING.
>>
>> I am currently working on top of Eric's tree for nested stage support [1].
>> My best guess was that the vfio_pci_dma_fault_init() method [2] that is
>> requesting DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING causes stack overflow, and corruption.
>> That's when I added a new attribute.
>
> I see. I think there needs a change in the code there. Should also expect
> a nesting_info returned instead of an int anymore. @Eric, how about your
> opinion?
>
> domain = iommu_get_domain_for_dev(&vdev->pdev->dev);
> ret = iommu_domain_get_attr(domain, DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING, &info);
> if (ret || !(info.features & IOMMU_NESTING_FEAT_PAGE_RESP)) {
> /*
> * No need go futher as no page request service support.
> */
> return 0;
> }
Sure I think it is "just" a matter of synchro between the 2 series. Yi,
do you have plans to respin part of
[PATCH v7 00/16] vfio: expose virtual Shared Virtual Addressing to VMs
or would you allow me to embed this patch in my series.
Thanks
Eric
>
> https://github.com/luxis1999/linux-vsva/blob/vsva-linux-5.9-rc6-v8%2BPRQ/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c
>
> Regards,
> Yi Liu
>
>> I will soon publish my patches to the list for review. Let me know
>> your thoughts.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/eauger/linux/tree/5.10-rc4-2stage-v13
>> [2] https://github.com/eauger/linux/blob/5.10-rc4-2stage-
>> v13/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c#L494
>>
>> Thanks
>> Vivek
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Yi Liu
>>
>> [snip]
