Hi Robin,
On 19.12.2017 17:34, Robin Murphy wrote:
Hi Tomasz,
On 19/12/17 15:13, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
Here is my lspci output of ThunderX2 for which I am observing kernel
panic coming from
SMMUv3 driver -> arm_smmu_write_strtab_ent() -> BUG_ON(ste_live):
# lspci -vt
-[0000:00]-+-00.0-[01-1f]--+ [...]
+ [...]
\-00.0-[1e-1f]----00.0-[1f]----00.0
ASPEED Technology, Inc. ASPEED Graphics Family
ASP device -> 1f:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ASPEED Technology,
Inc. ASPEED Graphics Family
PCI-Express to PCI/PCI-X Bridge -> 1e:00.0 PCI bridge: ASPEED
Technology, Inc. AST1150 PCI-to-PCI Bridge
While setting up ASP device SID in IORT dirver:
iort_iommu_configure() -> pci_for_each_dma_alias()
we need to walk up and iterate over each device which alias
transaction from
downstream devices.
AST device (1f:00.0) gets BDF=0x1f00 and corresponding SID=0x1f00 from
IORT.
Bridge (1e:00.0) is the first alias. Following PCI Express to
PCI/PCI-X Bridge
spec: PCIe-to-PCI/X bridges alias transactions from downstream devices
using
the subordinate bus number. For bridge (1e:00.0), the subordinate is
equal
to 0x1f. This gives BDF=0x1f00 and SID=1f00 which is the same as
downstream
device. So it is possible to have two identical SIDs. The question is
what we
should do about such case. Presented patch prevents from registering
the same
ID so that SMMUv3 is not complaining later on.
Ooh, subtle :( There is logic in arm_smmu_attach_device() to tolerate
grouped devices aliasing to the same ID, but I guess I overlooked the
distinction of a device sharing an alias ID with itself. I'm not sure
I really like trying to work around this in generic code, since
fwspec->ids is essentially opaque data in a driver-specific format - in
theory a driver is free to encode a single logical ID into multiple
fwspec elements (I think I did that in an early draft of SMMUv2 SMR
support), at which point this approach might corrupt things massively.
I don't have strong favourite here, the fix in SMMUv3 driver would work
too. Initially we can fix things for SMMUv3 only and if ever face the
same issue for other IOMMU driver, then we can move it to generic layer.
Does the (untested) diff below suffice?
Robin.
----->8-----diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index f122071688fd..d8a730d83401 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
@@ -1731,7 +1731,7 @@ static __le64 *arm_smmu_get_step_for_sid(struct
arm_smmu_device *smmu, u32 sid)
static void arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev(struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec)
{
- int i;
+ int i, j;
struct arm_smmu_master_data *master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = master->smmu;
@@ -1739,6 +1739,13 @@ static void arm_smmu_install_ste_for_dev(struct
iommu_fwspec *fwspec)
u32 sid = fwspec->ids[i];
__le64 *step = arm_smmu_get_step_for_sid(smmu, sid);
+ /* Bridged PCI devices may end up with duplicated IDs */
+ for (j = 0; j < i; j++)
+ if (fwspec->ids[j] == sid)
+ break;
+ if (j < i)
+ continue;
+
arm_smmu_write_strtab_ent(smmu, sid, step, &master->ste);
}
}
Yes, worked for me.
Thanks,
Tomasz
