On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 09:47:08PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:
> Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with
> 10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not
> support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should
> emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to
> disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.
> "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable
> 10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.
s/10-BIT/10-Bit/ several times.
Add blank lines between paragraphs.
> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> #include <linux/random.h>
> #include <linux/seq_buf.h>
> #include <linux/xarray.h>
> +#include "pci.h"
>
> enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {
> PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,
> @@ -410,6 +411,41 @@ static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)
> (client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;
> }
>
> +static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,
s/vaild/valid/
Or maybe s/valid/safe/ or s/valid/supported/, since "valid" isn't
quite the right word here. We want to know whether the source is
enabled to generate 10-bit tags, and if so, whether the destination
can handle them.
"if (check_10bit_tags_valid())" does not make sense because
"check_10bit_tags_valid()" is not a question with a yes/no answer.
"10bit_tags_valid()" *might* be, because "if (10bit_tags_valid())"
makes sense. But I don't think you can start with a digit.
Or maybe you want to invert the sense, e.g.,
"10bit_tags_unsupported()", since that avoids negation at the caller:
if (10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||
10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))
map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;
Doesn't this patch need to be at the very beginning, before you start
enabling 10-bit tags? Otherwise there's a hole in the middle where we
enable them and P2P DMA might break.
> + bool verbose)
> +{
> + bool req;
> + bool comp;
> + u16 ctl2;
> +
> + if (a->is_virtfn) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV
> + req = !!(a->physfn->sriov->ctrl &
> + PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VF_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);
> +#endif
> + } else {
> + pcie_capability_read_word(a, PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2, &ctl2);
> + req = !!(ctl2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);
> + }
> +
> + comp = !!(b->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_COMP);
> + if (req && (!comp)) {
> + if (verbose) {
> + pci_warn(a, "cannot be used for peer-to-peer DMA as 10-Bit Tag Requester enable is set in device (%s), but peer device (%s) does not support the 10-Bit Tag Completer\n",
> + pci_name(a), pci_name(b));
No point in printing pci_name(a) twice. pci_warn() prints it already;
that should be enough.
I think you can simplify this a little, e.g.,
if (!req) /* 10-bit tags not enabled on requester */
return true;
if (comp) /* completer can handle anything */
return true;
/* error case */
if (!verbose)
return false;
pci_warn(...);
return false;
> + if (a->is_virtfn)
> + pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl\n",
> + pci_name(a));
> + else
> + pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/10bit_tag\n",
> + pci_name(a));
> + }
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Calculate the P2PDMA mapping type and distance between two PCI devices.
> *
> @@ -532,6 +568,10 @@ calc_map_type_and_dist(struct pci_dev *provider, struct pci_dev *client,
> map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;
> }
> done:
> + if (!check_10bit_tags_vaild(client, provider, verbose) ||
> + !check_10bit_tags_vaild(provider, client, verbose))
> + map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;
> +
> rcu_read_lock();
> p2pdma = rcu_dereference(provider->p2pdma);
> if (p2pdma)
> --
> 2.7.4
>
