Received: by 2002:a25:ad19:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y25csp4905810ybi; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 10:10:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyvMrDtsDwXM0L+Jdx9wcoymHk5s8B0nO0b6nKPxUfx/GL/XuSwOZTWAOBXhLwCwKbrHZKo X-Received: by 2002:a63:fe52:: with SMTP id x18mr109446341pgj.344.1564506635266; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 10:10:35 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1564506635; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=UVrc0hS61+La3CM/lHWdVJbwHQr8QKsarSYco4SvcvYx1+v9J4vxsn1SBHQTJ8CQdC Q+6cUA7stc35ieB6evBUg6Ieo9b97CH49/izjnrwBlz0l29A9eiPEntWaUhKJbmGo1vK 2oKNoXijd6tGIMOAgb/jZRW7tw+9D1ZQ7JeXxuGD/4B/2/yzgmjLtUB5HFYVKSVjtycW jb1OM4lqPHpbEZshXDhjZO9JtUf/9gZzDGNWmaFYz8ToMXjHftOdy5jkq+I9TnDCvl9Q FvRF8pxtwkFDjZrrkLhLuKQJugAk3IEq8SIxjuh3NNZlcc+aJASvF9kKrOS5St9Ey4Lz 4k0A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=ehufM82KvrwMbeUXkg1y9UPJXzH5TQFRNAGMhWxNy9U=; b=Fyw4VJDI5BluIZoWYdeaP8FVd/Zww4MEe4Bd0XwbaAn1LBAUTVtxqSufUnkjOsCT/Q mbcGo/vIlUqxLdCdUoI8Ae6omo4XkWP7eiOc4289Z+oxKslQCkJnZ87sT5bELVNfhYD/ 4IXhRih4NJteliBRgL13xcoxNdTFuMZpXo6XNFhA/85uXl5iCQO27sh1e2cKvyeN7Ezx HIXyqLYIOWd9FANiIKYjsOsPe9mHCvw+SzwOAq2wYzCoTnkNukuKZEehXhNuXZ38fNeO 5/7KP9a1rLqrV5T3CYjlY2qPO4PHizjng1lNVWW88qsXwHB8cc1gVxJHxpwIJ9M2Rkdv d/7A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z2si28483380pgv.417.2019.07.30.10.10.19; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 10:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729590AbfG3LW2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 30 Jul 2019 07:22:28 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:59468 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726870AbfG3LW2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jul 2019 07:22:28 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B350228; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 04:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.197.57] (e110467-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.57]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B416E3F575; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 04:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Failure to recreate virtual functions To: Lu Baolu , Vlad Buslov Cc: Joerg Roedel , Ran Rozenstein , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" , Maor Gottlieb References: <838a00c4-d5bd-08db-e39c-5f00686858b5@linux.intel.com> From: Robin Murphy Message-ID: <6ece232e-3fe8-4bd9-cd4b-c8d90a106a30@arm.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 12:22:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <838a00c4-d5bd-08db-e39c-5f00686858b5@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 30/07/2019 05:28, Lu Baolu wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/29/19 6:05 PM, Vlad Buslov wrote: >> On Sat 27 Jul 2019 at 05:15, Lu Baolu  wrote: >>> Hi Vilad, >>> >>> On 7/27/19 12:30 AM, Vlad Buslov wrote: >>>> Hi Lu Baolu, >>>> >>>> Our mlx5 driver fails to recreate VFs when cmdline includes >>>> "intel_iommu=on iommu=pt" after recent merge of patch set "iommu/vt-d: >>>> Delegate DMA domain to generic iommu". I've bisected the failure to >>>> patch b7297783c2bb ("iommu/vt-d: Remove duplicated code for device >>>> hotplug"). Here is the dmesg log for following case: enable switchdev >>>> mode, set number of VFs to 0, then set it back to any value >>>>> 0. >>>> [  223.525282] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: E-Switch enable >>>> SRIOV: nvfs(2) mode (1) >>>> [  223.562027] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: SRIOV enabled: >>>> active vports(3) >>>> [  223.663766] pci 0000:81:00.2: [15b3:101a] type 00 class 0x020000 >>>> [  223.663864] pci 0000:81:00.2: enabling Extended Tags >>>> [  223.665143] pci 0000:81:00.2: Adding to iommu group 52 >>>> [  223.665215] pci 0000:81:00.2: Using iommu direct mapping >>>> [  223.665771] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.2: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) >>>> [  223.665890] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.2: firmware version: 16.26.148 >>>> [  223.889908] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.2: Rate limit: 127 rates are >>>> supported, range: 0Mbps to 97656Mbps >>>> [  223.896438] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.2: MLX5E: StrdRq(1) RqSz(8) >>>> StrdSz(2048) RxCqeCmprss(0) >>>> [  223.896636] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.2: Assigned random MAC address >>>> 56:1f:95:e0:51:d6 >>>> [  224.012905] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.2 ens1f0v0: renamed from eth0 >>>> [  224.041651] pci 0000:81:00.3: [15b3:101a] type 00 class 0x020000 >>>> [  224.041711] pci 0000:81:00.3: enabling Extended Tags >>>> [  224.043660] pci 0000:81:00.3: Adding to iommu group 53 >>>> [  224.043738] pci 0000:81:00.3: Using iommu direct mapping >>>> [  224.044196] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.3: enabling device (0000 -> 0002) >>>> [  224.044298] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.3: firmware version: 16.26.148 >>>> [  224.268099] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.3: Rate limit: 127 rates are >>>> supported, range: 0Mbps to 97656Mbps >>>> [  224.274983] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.3: MLX5E: StrdRq(1) RqSz(8) >>>> StrdSz(2048) RxCqeCmprss(0) >>>> [  224.275195] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.3: Assigned random MAC address >>>> a6:1e:56:0a:d9:f2 >>>> [  224.388359] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.3 ens1f0v1: renamed from eth0 >>>> [  236.325027] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: disable SRIOV: >>>> active vports(3) mode(1) >>>> [  236.362766] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: E-Switch enable >>>> SRIOV: nvfs(2) mode (2) >>>> [  237.290066] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: MLX5E: StrdRq(1) RqSz(8) >>>> StrdSz(2048) RxCqeCmprss(0) >>>> [  237.350215] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: MLX5E: StrdRq(1) RqSz(8) >>>> StrdSz(2048) RxCqeCmprss(0) >>>> [  237.373052] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0 ens1f0: renamed from eth0 >>>> [  237.390768] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: MLX5E: StrdRq(1) RqSz(8) >>>> StrdSz(2048) RxCqeCmprss(0) >>>> [  237.447846] ens1f0_0: renamed from eth0 >>>> [  237.460399] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: SRIOV enabled: >>>> active vports(3) >>>> [  237.526880] ens1f0_1: renamed from eth1 >>>> [  248.953873] pci 0000:81:00.2: Removing from iommu group 52 >>>> [  248.954114] pci 0000:81:00.3: Removing from iommu group 53 >>>> [  249.960570] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: disable SRIOV: >>>> active vports(3) mode(2) >>>> [  250.319135] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: MLX5E: StrdRq(1) RqSz(8) >>>> StrdSz(2048) RxCqeCmprss(0) >>>> [  250.559431] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0 ens1f0: renamed from eth0 >>>> [  258.819162] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: E-Switch enable >>>> SRIOV: nvfs(2) mode (1) >>>> [  258.831625] mlx5_core 0000:81:00.0: E-Switch: SRIOV enabled: >>>> active vports(3) >>>> [  258.936160] pci 0000:81:00.2: [15b3:101a] type 00 class 0x020000 >>>> [  258.936258] pci 0000:81:00.2: enabling Extended Tags >>>> [  258.937438] pci 0000:81:00.2: Failed to add to iommu group 52: -16 >>> It seems that an EBUSY error returned from iommu_group_add_device(). Can >>> you please hack some debug messages in iommu_group_add_device() so that >>> we can know where the EBUSY returns? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Baolu >> The error code is returned by __iommu_attach_device(). >> > > Thanks! > > It looks like the system has already a domain for specific pci bdf > device. Does this VF share the bdf with other devices? Or has been > previously created, and system failed to get chance to remove it? At a glance, it looks like it might be down to intel_iommu_remove_device() not calling dmar_remove_one_dev_info() like the old notifier did. If the group is getting torn down and recreated, but the driver still has a stale pointer to the old default domain cached, which dmar_insert_one_dev_info() finds and returns, that would seem to explain the observed behaviour. Robin.