Re: [PATCH] Revert "iommu/io-pgtable-arm: Optimise non-coherent unmap"

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

 



On 05/09/2024 4:53 pm, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Rob,

On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 05:49:56AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

This reverts commit 85b715a334583488ad7fbd3001fe6fd617b7d4c0.

It was causing gpu smmu faults on x1e80100.

I _think_ what is causing this is the change in ordering of
__arm_lpae_clear_pte() (dma_sync_single_for_device() on the pgtable
memory) and io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk().  I'm not entirely sure how
this patch is supposed to work correctly in the face of other
concurrent translations (to buffers unrelated to the one being
unmapped(), because after the io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk() we can have
stale data read back into the tlb.

Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c | 31 ++++++++++++++-----------------
  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

Please can you try the diff below, instead?

Given that the GPU driver's .tlb_add_page is a no-op, I can't see this making a difference. In fact, given that msm_iommu_pagetable_unmap() still does a brute-force iommu_flush_iotlb_all() after io-pgtable returns, and in fact only recently made .tlb_flush_walk start doing anything either for the sake of the map path, I'm now really wondering how this patch has had any effect at all... :/


Will

--->8

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
index 0e67f1721a3d..0a32e9499e2c 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
@@ -672,7 +672,7 @@ static size_t __arm_lpae_unmap(struct arm_lpae_io_pgtable *data,
                 /* Clear the remaining entries */
                 __arm_lpae_clear_pte(ptep, &iop->cfg, i);
- if (gather && !iommu_iotlb_gather_queued(gather))
+               if (!iommu_iotlb_gather_queued(gather))

Note that this would reintroduce the latent issue which was present originally, wherein iommu_iotlb_gather_queued(NULL) is false, but if we actually allow a NULL gather to be passed to io_pgtable_tlb_add_page() it may end up being dereferenced (e.g. in arm-smmu-v3).

Thanks,
Robin.

                         for (int j = 0; j < i; j++)
                                 io_pgtable_tlb_add_page(iop, gather, iova + j * size, size);




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux