On 12/22/2023 6:41 PM, Ethan Zhao wrote:
Even the devTLB invalidation request is just submitted and waiting it
to be done/timeout in qi_submit_sync(), it is possible device is removed
or powered-off. try to break it out in such rare but possible case.
This patch is sent for more comment. not tested, only passed compiling.
Signed-off-by: Ethan Zhao <haifeng.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c | 3 ++-
drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c
index 23cb80d62a9a..d8637ab93387 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c
@@ -1422,7 +1422,8 @@ int qi_submit_sync(struct intel_iommu *iommu, struct qi_desc *desc,
*/
writel(qi->free_head << shift, iommu->reg + DMAR_IQT_REG);
- while (qi->desc_status[wait_index] != QI_DONE) {
+ while (qi->desc_status[wait_index] != QI_DONE &&
+ qi->desc_status[wait_index] != QI_ABORT) {
Another way is checking pci_device_is_present() here and bail out,
how about it ?
/*
* We will leave the interrupts disabled, to prevent interrupt
* context to queue another cmd while a cmd is already submitted
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
index 897159dba47d..33075d0688bc 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
@@ -4472,10 +4472,46 @@ static struct iommu_device *intel_iommu_probe_device(struct device *dev)
return &iommu->iommu;
}
+static void intel_iommu_abort_devtlib_invalidate(struct device *dev)
+{
+ struct device_domain_info *info = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
+ struct intel_iommu *iommu = info->iommu;
+ struct q_inval *qi = iommu->qi;
+ struct qi_desc *desc, *idesc;
+ int index, offset, shift;
+ u16 sid, qdep, pfsid
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ if (!dev_is_pci(info->dev) || !info->ats_enabled || !qi)
+ return;
+ if (!pci_dev_is_disconnected(to_pci_dev(dev)))
+ return;
+
+ sid = info->bus << 8 | info->devfn;
+ qdep = info->ats_qdep;
+ pfsid = info->pfsid;
+
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&qi->q_lock, flags);
+ for (index = 1; index < QI_LENGTH; index++) {
+ offset = index << shift;
+ desc = qi->desc + offset;
+ if (desc->qw0 & QI_IWD_TYPE) {
+ offset = (index-1) << shift;
+ idesc = qi->desc + offset;
+ if (idesc->qw0 & QI_DEV_EIOTLB_SID(sid)) {
+ if (qi->desc_status[index] == QI_IN_USE)
+ qi->desc_status[index] = QI_ABORT;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&qi->q_lock, flags);
+
+}
static void intel_iommu_release_device(struct device *dev)
{
struct device_domain_info *info = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
+ intel_iommu_abort_devtlib_invalidate(dev);
Wonder if there is lock something prevent pciehp_ist() supprise_removal
interrupt response re-enter to get here when another safe_removal is in
process,
if so , see above
dmar_remove_one_dev_info(dev);
intel_pasid_free_table(dev);
intel_iommu_debugfs_remove_dev(info);
