On 2/19/21 3:32 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 04:56:01PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:40:23AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> So one thing that has been on my mind for a while: I'd really like
>>> to kill the separate dma ops in Xen swiotlb. If we compare xen-swiotlb
>>> to swiotlb the main difference seems to be:
>>>
>>> - additional reasons to bounce I/O vs the plain DMA capable
>>> - the possibility to do a hypercall on arm/arm64
>>> - an extra translation layer before doing the phys_to_dma and vice
>>> versa
>>> - an special memory allocator
>>>
>>> I wonder if inbetween a few jump labels or other no overhead enablement
>>> options and possibly better use of the dma_range_map we could kill
>>> off most of swiotlb-xen instead of maintaining all this code duplication?
>> So I looked at this a bit more.
>>
>> For x86 with XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap (how common is that?)
> Juergen, Boris please correct me if I am wrong, but that XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap
> only works for PVH guests?
That's both HVM and PVH (for dom0 it's only PVH).
-boris
>
>> pfn_to_gfn is a nop, so plain phys_to_dma/dma_to_phys do work as-is.
>>
>> xen_arch_need_swiotlb always returns true for x86, and
>> range_straddles_page_boundary should never be true for the
>> XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap case.
> Correct. The kernel should have no clue of what the real MFNs are
> for PFNs.
>> So as far as I can tell the mapping fast path for the
>> XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap can be trivially reused from swiotlb.
>>
>> That leaves us with the next more complicated case, x86 or fully cache
>> coherent arm{,64} without XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap. In that case
>> we need to patch in a phys_to_dma/dma_to_phys that performs the MFN
>> lookup, which could be done using alternatives or jump labels.
>> I think if that is done right we should also be able to let that cover
>> the foreign pages in is_xen_swiotlb_buffer/is_swiotlb_buffer, but
>> in that worst case that would need another alternative / jump label.
>>
>> For non-coherent arm{,64} we'd also need to use alternatives or jump
>> labels to for the cache maintainance ops, but that isn't a hard problem
>> either.
>>
>>
