On 31/05/17 18:23, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 07:01:38PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> Address Translation Service (ATS) is an extension to PCIe allowing
>> endpoints to manage their own IOTLB, called Address Translation Cache
>> (ATC). Instead of having every memory transaction processed by the IOMMU,
>> the endpoint can first send an Address Translation Requests for an IOVA,
>> obtain the corresponding Physical Address from the IOMMU and store it in
>> its ATC. Subsequent transactions to this memory region can be performed on
>> the PA, in which case they are marked 'translated' and (partially) bypass
>> the IOMMU.
>>
>> Since the extension uses fields that were previously reserved in the
>> PCIe Translation Layer Packet, it seems ill-advised to enabled it on a
>> system that doesn't fully support ATS.
>>
>> To "old" root complexes that simply ignored the new AT field, an Address
>> Translation Request will look exactly like a Memory Read Request, so the
>> root bridge will forward a memory read to the IOMMU instead of a
>> translation request. If the access succeeds, the RC will send a Read
>> Completion, which looks like a Translation Completion, back to the
>> endpoint. As a result the endpoint might end up storing the content of
>> memory instead of a physical address in its ATC. In reality, it's more
>> likely that the size fields will be invalid and either end will detect the
>> error, but in any case, it is undesirable.
>>
>> Add a way for firmware to tell the OS that ATS is supported by the PCI
>> root complex.
>
> Can't firmware have already enabled ATS? Often for things like this, not
> present means "use firmware setting".
I don't think it's up to firmware to enable ATS in endpoints, because it
depends on IOMMU properties (e.g. configured page size). It must also be
enabled after the PASID capability, which the OS may or may not want to
enable.
While endpoints have ATS capability and config register, there is no
architected mechanism in root complexes as far as I know. So firmware may
have a mechanism outside the OS scope to toggle ATS in the root complex.
If there is a bug and firmware cannot enable ATS, then the OS must be made
aware of it, so that it doesn't enable ATS in endpoints, or else we might
end up with silent memory corruption as described above. (Lack of ATS may
slow the system down but shouldn't be fatal.)
If the SMMU supports ATS, then the root complex attached to it will most
likely supports ATS. The switch in this patch simply allows firmware to
confirm that.
>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe.brucker@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci-iommu.txt | 8 ++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci-iommu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci-iommu.txt
>> index 0def586fdcdf..f21a68ec471a 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci-iommu.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci-iommu.txt
>> @@ -44,6 +44,14 @@ Optional properties
>> - iommu-map-mask: A mask to be applied to each Requester ID prior to being
>> mapped to an IOMMU specifier per the iommu-map property.
>>
>> +- ats-supported: if present, the root complex supports the Address
>> + Translation Service (ATS). It is able to interpret the AT field in PCIe
>> + Transaction Layer Packets, and forward Translation Completions or
>> + Invalidation Requests to endpoints.
>
> Why can't this be based on the compatible strings?
Host controllers like the generic ECAM one should be able to advertise
ATS, if for instance the virtual IOMMU in Qemu offers a channel for ATS
invalidation. In that case we would have pci-host-{e,}cam-generic{-ats,}
compatible strings and double the number of compatible strings each time
we add a similar capability.
Thanks,
Jean
