On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 03:54:33PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:47:52AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > The other approach would be to add a sequence number to each event and
> > > let userspace detect the non-montonicity. It would require adding a
> > > header to the native ARM evt.
> >
> > Yea, I thought about that. The tricky thing is that the header will
> > be a core-level header pairing with a driver-level vEVENTQ type and
> > can never change its length, though we can define a 64-bit flag that
> > can reserve the other 63 bits for future use?
>
> The header format could be revised by changing the driver specific
> format tag.
Yea, we need a header format (or "header type") when the vEVENTQ
is allocated.
> You'd want to push a special event when the first overflow happens and
> probably also report a counter so userspace can know how many events
> got lost.
How about this:
enum iommufd_veventq_header_type {
IOMMU_VEVENTQ_HEADER_TYPE_V1,
};
enum iommu_hwpt_pgfault_flags {
IOMMU_VEVENT_HEADER_FLAGS_OVERFLOW = (1 << 0),
};
struct iommufd_vevent_header_v1 {
__u64 flags;
__u32 num_events;
__u32 num_overflows; // valid if flag_overflow is set
};
> This seems most robust and simplest to implement..
>
> I think I'd implement it by having a static overflow list entry so no
> memory allocation is needed and just keep moving that entry to the
> back of the list every time an event is lost. This way it will cover
> lost events due to memory outages too
Could double-adding the same static node to the list happen and
corrupt the list?
I think the vevent_header doesn't need to be exactly match with
the driver event. So, maybe a vEVENTQ object could hold a header
structure during iommu_veventq_alloc?
struct iommufd_veventq {
...
atomic_t num_events;
atomic_t num_overflows;
DECLARE_BITMAP(errors, 32);
struct iommufd_vevent_header_v1 *header;
};
The header is a bit redundant to its upper three members though.
> For old formats like the fault queue you could return EOVERFLOW
> whenever the sequence number becomes discontiguous or it sees the
> overflow event..
So, IOMMU_OBJ_FAULT is safe to return EOVERFLOW via read(), as
you mentioned that it is self-limited right?
Thanks
Nicolin
