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;
Date:   Tue, 4 Feb 2020 19:35:00 +0000
From:   Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@amd.com>
To:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>, hch@lst.de,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com,
        x86@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        dave.hansen@linux-intel.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brijesh.singh@amd.com,
        Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] swiotlb: Adjust SWIOTBL bounce buffer size for SEV
 guests.
Message-ID: <20200204193500.GA15564@ashkalra_ubuntu_server>
References: <20191209231346.5602-1-Ashish.Kalra@amd.com>
 <20191220015245.GA7010@localhost.localdomain>
 <20200121200947.GA24884@ashkalra_ubuntu_server>
 <20200121205403.GC75374@Konrads-MacBook-Pro.local>
 <20200124230008.GA1565@ashkalra_ubuntu_server>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200124230008.GA1565@ashkalra_ubuntu_server>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: amd.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 6a38b3e2-3bdb-4f35-2f57-08d7a9a9578e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Feb 2020 19:35:08.5294
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 3dd8961f-e488-4e60-8e11-a82d994e183d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: kPlOCNddt85RM0luILDny1ZZ1DCPLWD9dQn3VfNLrw5vDUiKvhrdqJOhQfHPm/KDvWXzR9zxbw8V/+2EJEcjuw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR12MB2559
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hello Konrad,

Looking fwd. to your feedback regarding support of other memory
encryption architectures such as Power, S390, etc.

Thanks,
Ashish

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 11:00:08PM +0000, Ashish Kalra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:54:03PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > 
> > > Additional memory calculations based on # of PCI devices and
> > > their memory ranges will make it more complicated with so
> > > many other permutations and combinations to explore, it is
> > > essential to keep this patch as simple as possible by 
> > > adjusting the bounce buffer size simply by determining it
> > > from the amount of provisioned guest memory.
> >> 
> >> Please rework the patch to:
> >> 
> >>  - Use a log solution instead of the multiplication.
> >>    Feel free to cap it at a sensible value.
> 
> Ok.
> 
> >> 
> >>  - Also the code depends on SWIOTLB calling in to the
> >>    adjust_swiotlb_default_size which looks wrong.
> >> 
> >>    You should not adjust io_tlb_nslabs from swiotlb_size_or_default.
> 
> >>    That function's purpose is to report a value.
> >> 
> >>  - Make io_tlb_nslabs be visible outside of the SWIOTLB code.
> >> 
> >>  - Can you utilize the IOMMU_INIT APIs and have your own detect which would
> >>    modify the io_tlb_nslabs (and set swiotbl=1?).
> 
> This seems to be a nice option, but then IOMMU_INIT APIs are
> x86-specific and this swiotlb buffer size adjustment is also needed
> for other memory encryption architectures like Power, S390, etc.
> 
> >> 
> >>    Actually you seem to be piggybacking on pci_swiotlb_detect_4gb - so
> >>    perhaps add in this code ? Albeit it really should be in it's own
> >>    file, not in arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c
> 
> Actually, we piggyback on pci_swiotlb_detect_override which sets
> swiotlb=1 as x86_64_start_kernel() and invocation of sme_early_init()
> forces swiotlb on, but again this is all x86 architecture specific.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ashish