Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] iommu/arm-smmu: Add support for driver IOMMU fault handlers

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

 



On 2021-01-25 21:51, Jordan Crouse wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 12:53:17PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
On 2021-01-22 12:41, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 12:15:58PM -0700, Jordan Crouse wrote:
Call report_iommu_fault() to allow upper-level drivers to register their
own fault handlers.

Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

  drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
index 0f28a8614da3..7fd18bbda8f5 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
@@ -427,6 +427,7 @@ static irqreturn_t arm_smmu_context_fault(int irq, void *dev)
  	struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain);
  	struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
  	int idx = smmu_domain->cfg.cbndx;
+	int ret;
  	fsr = arm_smmu_cb_read(smmu, idx, ARM_SMMU_CB_FSR);
  	if (!(fsr & ARM_SMMU_FSR_FAULT))
@@ -436,11 +437,20 @@ static irqreturn_t arm_smmu_context_fault(int irq, void *dev)
  	iova = arm_smmu_cb_readq(smmu, idx, ARM_SMMU_CB_FAR);
  	cbfrsynra = arm_smmu_gr1_read(smmu, ARM_SMMU_GR1_CBFRSYNRA(idx));
-	dev_err_ratelimited(smmu->dev,
-	"Unhandled context fault: fsr=0x%x, iova=0x%08lx, fsynr=0x%x, cbfrsynra=0x%x, cb=%d\n",
+	ret = report_iommu_fault(domain, dev, iova,
+		fsynr & ARM_SMMU_FSYNR0_WNR ? IOMMU_FAULT_WRITE : IOMMU_FAULT_READ);
+
+	if (ret == -ENOSYS)
+		dev_err_ratelimited(smmu->dev,
+		"Unhandled context fault: fsr=0x%x, iova=0x%08lx, fsynr=0x%x, cbfrsynra=0x%x, cb=%d\n",
  			    fsr, iova, fsynr, cbfrsynra, idx);
-	arm_smmu_cb_write(smmu, idx, ARM_SMMU_CB_FSR, fsr);
+	/*
+	 * If the iommu fault returns an error (except -ENOSYS) then assume that
+	 * they will handle resuming on their own
+	 */
+	if (!ret || ret == -ENOSYS)
+		arm_smmu_cb_write(smmu, idx, ARM_SMMU_CB_FSR, fsr);

Hmm, I don't grok this part. If the fault handler returned an error and
we don't clear the FSR, won't we just re-take the irq immediately?

If we don't touch the FSR at all, yes. Even if we clear the fault indicator
bits, the interrupt *might* remain asserted until a stalled transaction is
actually resolved - that's that lovely IMP-DEF corner.

Robin.


This is for stall-on-fault. The idea is that if the developer chooses to do so
we would stall the GPU after a fault long enough to take a picture of it with
devcoredump and then release the FSR. Since we can't take the devcoredump from
the interrupt handler we schedule it in a worker and then return an error
to let the main handler know that we'll come back around clear the FSR later
when we are done.

Sure, but clearing FSR is not writing to RESUME to resolve the stalled transaction(s). You can already snarf the FSR contents from your report_iommu_fault() handler if you want to, so either way I don't see what's gained by not clearing it as expected at the point where we've handled the *interrupt*, even if it will take longer to decide what to do with the underlying *fault* that it signalled. I'm particularly not keen on having unusual behaviour in the core interrupt handling which callers may unwittingly trigger, for the sake of one very-very-driver-specific flow having a slightly richer debugging experience.

For actually *handling* faults, I thought we were going to need to hook up the new IOPF fault queue stuff anyway?

Robin.

It is assumed that we'll have to turn off interrupts in our handler to allow
this to work. Its all very implementation specific, but then again we're
assuming that if you want to do this then you know what you are doing.

In that spirit the error that skips the FSR should probably be something
specific instead of "all errors" - that way a well meaning handler that returns
a -EINVAL doesn't accidentally break itself.

Jordan

I think
it would be better to do this unconditionally, and print the "Unhandled
context fault" message for any non-zero value of ret.


Will





[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