On 04/10/17 14:50, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 12:22:04PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 27/09/17 14:32, Shameer Kolothum wrote:
>>> From: John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> On some platforms msi-controller address regions have to be excluded
>>> from normal IOVA allocation in that they are detected and decoded in
>>> a HW specific way by system components and so they cannot be considered
>>> normal IOVA address space.
>>>
>>> Add a helper function that retrieves msi address regions through device
>>> tree msi mapping, so that these regions will not be translated by IOMMU
>>> and will be excluded from IOVA allocations.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> [Shameer: Modified msi-parent retrieval logic]
>>> Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/linux/of_iommu.h | 10 +++++
>>> 2 files changed, 105 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
>>> index e60e3db..ffd7fb7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/iommu.h>
>>> #include <linux/limits.h>
>>> #include <linux/of.h>
>>> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
>>> #include <linux/of_iommu.h>
>>> #include <linux/of_pci.h>
>>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>>> @@ -138,6 +139,14 @@ static int of_iommu_xlate(struct device *dev,
>>> return ops->of_xlate(dev, iommu_spec);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int __get_pci_rid(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 alias, void *data)
>>> +{
>>> + u32 *rid = data;
>>> +
>>> + *rid = alias;
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> struct of_pci_iommu_alias_info {
>>> struct device *dev;
>>> struct device_node *np;
>>> @@ -163,6 +172,73 @@ static int of_pci_iommu_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 alias, void *data)
>>> return info->np == pdev->bus->dev.of_node;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int of_iommu_alloc_resv_region(struct device_node *np,
>>> + struct list_head *head)
>>> +{
>>> + int prot = IOMMU_WRITE | IOMMU_NOEXEC | IOMMU_MMIO;
>>> + struct iommu_resv_region *region;
>>> + struct resource res;
>>> + int err;
>>> +
>>> + err = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &res);
>>
>> What is the rational for registering the first region only? Surely you
>> can have more than one region in an MSI controller (yes, your particular
>> case is the ITS which has only one, but we're trying to do something
>> generic here).
>>
>> Another issue I have with this code is that it inserts all of the ITS
>> MMIO in the RESV_MSI range. As long as we don't generate any page tables
>> for this, we're fine. But if we ever change this, we'll end-up with the
>> ITS programming interface being exposed to a device, which wouldn't be
>> acceptable.
>>
>> Why can't we have some generic property instead, that would describe the
>> actual ranges that cannot be translated? That way, no random insertion
>> of a random range, and relatively future proof.
Indeed. Furthermore, IORT has the advantage of being limited to a few
distinct device types and SBSA-compliant system topologies, so the
ITS-chasing is reasonable there (modulo only reserving GITS_TRANSLATER).
The scope of DT covers more embedded things as well like PCI host
controllers with internal MSI doorbells, and potentially even
direct-mapped memory regions for things like bootloader framebuffers to
prevent display glitches - a generic address/size/flags description of a
region could work for just about everything.
> IORT code has the same issue (ie it reserves all ITS regions) and I do
> not know where a property can be added to describe those ranges (IORT
> specs ? I'd rather not) in ACPI other than the IORT tables entries
> themselves.
>
>> I'm not sure where to declare it (PCIe node? IOMMU node?), but it'd feel
>> like a much nicer and simpler solution to this problem.
>
> It could be but if we throw ACPI into the picture we have to knock
> together Hisilicon specific namespace bindings to handle this and
> quickly.
As above I'm happy with the ITS-specific solution for ACPI given the
limits of IORT. What I had in mind for DT was something tied in with the
generic IOMMU bindings. Something like this is probably easiest to
handle, but does rather spread the information around:
pci {
...
iommu-map = <0 0 &iommu1 0x10000>;
iommu-reserved-ranges = <0x12340000 0x1000 IOMMU_MSI>,
<0x34560000 0x1000 IOMMU_MSI>;
};
display {
...
iommus = <&iommu1 0x20000>;
/* simplefb region */
iommu-reserved-ranges = <0x80080000 0x80000 IOMMU_DIRECT>,
};
Alternatively, something inspired by reserved-memory might perhaps be
conceptually neater, at the risk of being more complicated:
iommu1: iommu@acbd0000 {
...
#iommu-cells = <1>;
iommu-reserved-ranges {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1>;
its0_resv: msi@12340000 {
compatible = "iommu-msi-region";
reg = <0x12340000 0x1000>;
};
its1_resv: msi@34560000 {
compatible = "iommu-msi-region";
reg = <0x34560000 0x1000>;
};
fb_resv: direct@12340000 {
compatible = "iommu-direct-region";
reg = <0x80080000 0x80000>;
};
};
};
DT folks - any opinions?
Robin.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
