Hi, On 5/7/20 1:32 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 11:24:29AM +0000, Bharat Bhushan wrote: >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 5:53 AM >>> To: Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: jean-philippe@xxxxxxxxxx; joro@xxxxxxxxxx; jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; iommu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; >>> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; eric.auger.pro@xxxxxxxxx; eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx >>> Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5] iommu/virtio: Use page size bitmap supported by >>> endpoint >>> >>> External Email >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 03:00:04PM +0530, Bharat Bhushan wrote: >>>> Different endpoint can support different page size, probe endpoint if >>>> it supports specific page size otherwise use global page sizes. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> v4->v5: >>>> - Rebase to Linux v5.7-rc4 >>>> >>>> v3->v4: >>>> - Fix whitespace error >>>> >>>> v2->v3: >>>> - Fixed error return for incompatible endpoint >>>> - __u64 changed to __le64 in header file >>>> >>>> drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>>> include/uapi/linux/virtio_iommu.h | 7 +++++ >>>> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c >>>> b/drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c index d5cac4f46ca5..9513d2ab819e 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c >>>> @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct viommu_endpoint { >>>> struct viommu_dev *viommu; >>>> struct viommu_domain *vdomain; >>>> struct list_head resv_regions; >>>> + u64 pgsize_bitmap; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> struct viommu_request { >>>> @@ -415,6 +416,19 @@ static int viommu_replay_mappings(struct >>> viommu_domain *vdomain) >>>> return ret; >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static int viommu_set_pgsize_bitmap(struct viommu_endpoint *vdev, >>>> + struct virtio_iommu_probe_pgsize_mask *mask, >>>> + size_t len) >>>> +{ >>>> + u64 pgsize_bitmap = le64_to_cpu(mask->pgsize_bitmap); >>>> + >>>> + if (len < sizeof(*mask)) >>> >>> This is too late to validate length, you have dereferenced it already. >>> do it before the read pls. >> >> Yes, Will change here and other places as well >> >>> >>>> + return -EINVAL; >>> >>> OK but note that guest will then just proceed to ignore the property. Is that really >>> OK? Wouldn't host want to know? >> >> >> Guest need to be in sync with device, so yes seems like guest need to tell device which page-size-mask it is using. >> >> Corresponding spec change patch (https://www.mail-archive.com/virtio-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg06214.html) >> >> Would like Jean/Eric to comment here as well. >> >>> >>> >>>> + >>>> + vdev->pgsize_bitmap = pgsize_bitmap; >>> >>> what if bitmap is 0? Is that a valid size? I see a bunch of BUG_ON with that value ... >> >> As per spec proposed device is supposed to set at-least one bit. >> Will add a bug_on her. > > Or better fail probe ... Yes I agree I would rather fail the probe. > >> Should we add bug_on or switch to global config page-size mask if this is zero (notify device which page-size-mask it is using). > > It's a spec violation, I wouldn't try to use the device. > >>> >>> I also see a bunch of code like e.g. this: >>> >>> pg_size = 1UL << __ffs(pgsize_bitmap); >>> >>> which probably won't DTRT on a 32 bit guest if the bitmap has bits set in the high >>> word. >>> >> >> My thought is that in that case viommu_domain_finalise() will fail, do not proceed. > > That's undefined behaviour in C. You need to make sure this condition > is never reached. And spec does not make this illegal at all > so it looks like we actually need to handle this gracefully. > > >>> >>> >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> static int viommu_add_resv_mem(struct viommu_endpoint *vdev, >>>> struct virtio_iommu_probe_resv_mem *mem, >>>> size_t len) >>>> @@ -499,6 +513,9 @@ static int viommu_probe_endpoint(struct viommu_dev >>> *viommu, struct device *dev) >>>> case VIRTIO_IOMMU_PROBE_T_RESV_MEM: >>>> ret = viommu_add_resv_mem(vdev, (void *)prop, len); >>>> break; >>>> + case VIRTIO_IOMMU_PROBE_T_PAGE_SIZE_MASK: >>>> + ret = viommu_set_pgsize_bitmap(vdev, (void *)prop, len); >>>> + break; >>>> default: >>>> dev_err(dev, "unknown viommu prop 0x%x\n", type); >>>> } >>>> @@ -630,7 +647,7 @@ static int viommu_domain_finalise(struct >>>> viommu_endpoint *vdev, >>>> >>>> vdomain->id = (unsigned int)ret; >>>> >>>> - domain->pgsize_bitmap = viommu->pgsize_bitmap; >>>> + domain->pgsize_bitmap = vdev->pgsize_bitmap; >>>> domain->geometry = viommu->geometry; >>>> >>>> vdomain->map_flags = viommu->map_flags; >>>> @@ -654,6 +671,29 @@ static void viommu_domain_free(struct iommu_domain >>> *domain) >>>> kfree(vdomain); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +/* >>>> + * Check whether the endpoint's capabilities are compatible with >>>> +other >>>> + * endpoints in the domain. Report any inconsistency. >>>> + */ >>>> +static bool viommu_endpoint_is_compatible(struct viommu_endpoint *vdev, >>>> + struct viommu_domain *vdomain) { >>>> + struct device *dev = vdev->dev; >>>> + >>>> + if (vdomain->viommu != vdev->viommu) { >>>> + dev_err(dev, "cannot attach to foreign vIOMMU\n"); >>>> + return false; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + if (vdomain->domain.pgsize_bitmap != vdev->pgsize_bitmap) { >>>> + dev_err(dev, "incompatible domain bitmap 0x%lx != 0x%llx\n", >>>> + vdomain->domain.pgsize_bitmap, vdev->pgsize_bitmap); >>>> + return false; >>>> + } >>> >>> I'm confused by this. So let's assume host supports pages sizes of 4k, 2M, 1G. It >>> signals this in the properties. Nice. >>> Now domain supports 4k, 2M and that's all. Why is that a problem? >>> Just don't use 1G ... >> >> Is not it too to change the existing domain properties, for devices already attached to domain? New devices must match to domain page-size. > > Again if IOMMU supports more page sizes than domain uses, why is > that a problem? Just don't utilize the bits domain does not use. I think I agree with you in that case. However it is a problem in the opposite, ie. when a new device is added and this latter has less options than the existing domain, right? Thanks Eric > > >>> >>> >>>> + >>>> + return true; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> static int viommu_attach_dev(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct >>>> device *dev) { >>>> int i; >>>> @@ -670,9 +710,8 @@ static int viommu_attach_dev(struct iommu_domain >>> *domain, struct device *dev) >>>> * owns it. >>>> */ >>>> ret = viommu_domain_finalise(vdev, domain); >>>> - } else if (vdomain->viommu != vdev->viommu) { >>>> - dev_err(dev, "cannot attach to foreign vIOMMU\n"); >>>> - ret = -EXDEV; >>>> + } else if (!viommu_endpoint_is_compatible(vdev, vdomain)) { >>>> + ret = -EINVAL; >>>> } >>>> mutex_unlock(&vdomain->mutex); >>>> >>>> @@ -886,6 +925,7 @@ static int viommu_add_device(struct device *dev) >>>> >>>> vdev->dev = dev; >>>> vdev->viommu = viommu; >>>> + vdev->pgsize_bitmap = viommu->pgsize_bitmap; >>>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vdev->resv_regions); >>>> dev_iommu_priv_set(dev, vdev); >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_iommu.h >>>> b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_iommu.h >>>> index 48e3c29223b5..2cced7accc99 100644 >>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_iommu.h >>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_iommu.h >>> >>> As any virtio UAPI change, you need to copy virtio TC at some point before this is >>> merged ... >> >> Jean already send patch for same >> https://www.mail-archive.com/virtio-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg06214.html >> >> Do we need to do anything additional? > > > Yes, that is spec patch. you need to see the UAPI patch to virtio-dev. > >>> >>>> @@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ struct virtio_iommu_req_unmap { >>>> >>>> #define VIRTIO_IOMMU_PROBE_T_NONE 0 >>>> #define VIRTIO_IOMMU_PROBE_T_RESV_MEM 1 >>>> +#define VIRTIO_IOMMU_PROBE_T_PAGE_SIZE_MASK 2 >>>> >>>> #define VIRTIO_IOMMU_PROBE_T_MASK 0xfff >>>> >>> >>> Does host need to know that guest will ignore the page size mask? >>> Maybe we need a feature bit. >>> >>>> @@ -119,6 +120,12 @@ struct virtio_iommu_probe_property { >>>> __le16 length; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> +struct virtio_iommu_probe_pgsize_mask { >>>> + struct virtio_iommu_probe_property head; >>>> + __u8 reserved[4]; >>>> + __le64 pgsize_bitmap; >>>> +}; >>>> + >>> >>> This is UAPI. Document the format of pgsize_bitmap please. >> >> Ok, >> >> Thanks >> -Bharat >> >>> >>> >>>> #define VIRTIO_IOMMU_RESV_MEM_T_RESERVED 0 >>>> #define VIRTIO_IOMMU_RESV_MEM_T_MSI 1 >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 2.17.1 > _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization