Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201209002418.1976362-1-ben.widawsky@intel.com>
 <20201209002418.1976362-10-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <CAPcyv4ipGMsKegzWtd+W8wr4mG7X9DtVeQYvL24Eyu1fB3AN=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201209021254.ne42jy6ovn2rk3cf@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20201209021254.ne42jy6ovn2rk3cf@intel.com>
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 19:33:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4jJWYacUd_xCio29uAUPHzs7Ez9pCC1PpWF3iWHD+XAaw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/14] cxl/mem: Add basic IOCTL interface
To:     Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Cc:     linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        "Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@intel.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Jon Masters <jcm@jonmasters.org>,
        Chris Browy <cbrowy@avery-design.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:13 PM Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 20-12-08 17:37:50, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:24 PM Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add a straightforward IOCTL that provides a mechanism for userspace to
> > > query the supported memory device commands.
> > >
> > > Memory device commands are specified in 8.2.9 of the CXL 2.0
> > > specification. They are submitted through a mailbox mechanism specified
> > > in 8.2.8.4.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > I did attempt to use the same struct for querying commands as well as
> > > sending commands (upcoming patch). The number of unused fields between
> > > the two made for a bad fit IMO.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/cxl/memory-devices.rst |   9 +++
> > >  drivers/cxl/mem.c                    |  89 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h         | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  3 files changed, 200 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/cxl/memory-devices.rst b/Documentation/cxl/memory-devices.rst
> > > index 5f723c25382b..ec54674b3822 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/cxl/memory-devices.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/cxl/memory-devices.rst
> > > @@ -32,6 +32,15 @@ CXL Memory Device
> > >  .. kernel-doc:: drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > >     :internal:
> > >
> > > +CXL IOCTL Interface
> > > +-------------------
> > > +
> > > +.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> > > +   :doc: UAPI
> > > +
> > > +.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> > > +   :internal:
> > > +
> > >  External Interfaces
> > >  ===================
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/mem.c b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > > index bb6ea58f6c7b..2c4aadcea0e4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> > >  #include <linux/idr.h>
> > >  #include <linux/pci.h>
> > >  #include <linux/io.h>
> > > +#include <uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h>
> > >  #include "acpi.h"
> > >  #include "pci.h"
> > >  #include "cxl.h"
> > > @@ -73,6 +74,49 @@ static DEFINE_IDR(cxl_mem_idr);
> > >  /* protect cxl_mem_idr allocations */
> > >  static DEFINE_MUTEX(cxl_memdev_lock);
> > >
> > > +/*
> > > + * This table defines the supported mailboxes commands for the driver. The id is
> > > + * ordinal and thus gaps in this table aren't allowed. This table is made up of
> > > + * a UAPI structure. Non-negative values in the table will be validated against
> > > + * the user's input. For example, if size_in is 0, and the user passed in 1, it
> > > + * is an error.
> > > + */
> > > +#define CXL_CMD(_id, _flags, sin, sout, _name, _enable, op)                    \
> > > +       {                                                                      \
> > > +               { .id = CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_##_id,                              \
> > > +                 .flags = CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_##_flags,                      \
> > > +                 .size_in = sin,                                              \
> > > +                 .size_out = sout,                                            \
> > > +                 .name = _name },                                             \
> > > +                       .enable = _enable, .opcode = op                        \
> > > +       }
> >
> > Seems the ordinality requirement could be dropped if the definition was:
> >
> > #define CXL_CMD(_id, _flags, sin, sout, _name, _enable, op)                    \
> >        [CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_##_id] = {
> >                              \
> >                { .id = CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_##_id,                              \
> > ...
> >
> > Then command 0 and 42 could be defined out of order in the table.
> > Especially if we need to config-disable or deprecate commands, I think
> > it would be useful if this table was tolerant to being sparse.
> >
>
> How sparse are we talking? The current form does support sparseness, but
> obviously gets quite large if the ID numbering is similar to random
> distribution.

"Sparse" may have been the wrong word to use. I was implying sparse
enough that if I add command N+1 I don't need to be careful where I
put it in mem_commands, but still be able to rely on lookups into
mem_commands being indexed by the command-id.

> I think if we do see this being more like random distribution, it can be
> supported, but I think it adds a decent amount of complexity for what I see as
> not much reward - unless you know of a fairly simple way to create this data
> structure with full sparse ID support?

I'm expecting the command distribution to be mostly uniform, it's more
of the lookup property that I think would be useful especially for the
dynamic case of walking mem_commands to update it relative to what the
hardware supports or other metadata. Speaking of which I think @enable
should be turned into @flags of which 'enable' is one, in case we want
to define more flags in the future.

>
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * struct cxl_mem_command - Driver representation of a memory device command
> > > + * @info: Command information as it exists for the UAPI
> > > + * @opcode: The actual bits used for the mailbox protocol
> > > + * @enable: Whether the command is enabled. The driver may support a large set
> > > + *         of commands that may not be enabled. The primary reason a command
> > > + *         would not be enabled is for commands that are specified as optional
> > > + *         and the hardware doesn't support the command.
> > > + *
> > > + * The cxl_mem_command is the driver's internal representation of commands that
> > > + * are supported by the driver. Some of these commands may not be supported by
> > > + * the hardware (!@enable). The driver will use @info to validate the fields
> > > + * passed in by the user then submit the @opcode to the hardware.
> > > + *
> > > + * See struct cxl_command_info.
> > > + */
> > > +struct cxl_mem_command {
> > > +       const struct cxl_command_info info;
> > > +       const u16 opcode;
> > > +       bool enable;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static struct cxl_mem_command mem_commands[] = {
> > > +       CXL_CMD(INVALID, NONE, 0, 0, "Reserved", false, 0),
> > > +};
> > > +
> > >  static int cxl_mem_wait_for_doorbell(struct cxl_mem *cxlm)
> > >  {
> > >         const int timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(2000);
> > > @@ -268,8 +312,53 @@ static int cxl_mem_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> > >         return 0;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +static int cxl_mem_count_commands(void)
> > > +{
> > > +       int i, n = 0;
> > > +
> > > +       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(mem_commands); i++) {
> > > +               struct cxl_mem_command *c = &mem_commands[i];
> > > +
> > > +               if (c->enable)
> > > +                       n++;
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > > +       return n;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static long cxl_mem_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> > >  {
> > > +       if (cmd == CXL_MEM_QUERY_COMMANDS) {
> > > +               struct cxl_mem_query_commands __user *q = (void __user *)arg;
> > > +               u32 n_commands;
> > > +               int i, j;
> > > +
> > > +               if (get_user(n_commands, (u32 __user *)arg))
> > > +                       return -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > +               if (n_commands == 0)
> > > +                       return put_user(cxl_mem_count_commands(),
> > > +                                       (u32 __user *)arg);
> > > +
> > > +               for (i = 0, j = 0;
> > > +                    i < ARRAY_SIZE(mem_commands) && j < n_commands; i++) {
> > > +                       struct cxl_mem_command *c = &mem_commands[i];
> > > +                       const struct cxl_command_info *info = &c->info;
> > > +
> > > +                       if (!c->enable)
> > > +                               continue;
> > > +
> > > +                       if (copy_to_user(&q->commands[j], info, sizeof(*info)))
> > > +                               return -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > +                       if (copy_to_user(&q->commands[j].name, info->name,
> > > +                                        strlen(info->name)))
> > > +                               return -EFAULT;
> >
> > Not sure why this is needed, see comment below about @name in
> > cxl_mem_query_commands.
> >
> > > +
> > > +                       j++;
> > > +               }
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > >         return -ENOTTY;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h b/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..1d1e143f98ec
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
> > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
> > > +/*
> > > + * CXL IOCTLs for Memory Devices
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#ifndef _UAPI_CXL_MEM_H_
> > > +#define _UAPI_CXL_MEM_H_
> > > +
> > > +#if defined(__cplusplus)
> > > +extern "C" {
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * DOC: UAPI
> > > + *
> > > + * CXL memory devices expose UAPI to have a standard user interface.
> > > + * Userspace can refer to these structure definitions and UAPI formats
> > > + * to communicate to driver
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#define CXL_MEM_QUERY_COMMANDS _IOR('C', 1, struct cxl_mem_query_commands)
> > > +
> > > +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_NAME_LENGTH 32
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * struct cxl_command_info - Command information returned from a query.
> > > + * @id: ID number for the command.
> > > + * @flags: Flags that specify command behavior.
> > > + *
> > > + *          - CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_TAINT: Using this command will taint the kernel.
> > > + * @size_in: Expected input size, or -1 if variable length.
> > > + * @size_out: Expected output size, or -1 if variable length.
> > > + * @name: Name describing the command.
> > > + *
> > > + * Represents a single command that is supported by both the driver and the
> > > + * hardware. The is returned as part of an array from the query ioctl. The
> > > + * following would be a command named "foobar" that takes a variable length
> > > + * input and returns 0 bytes of output.
> > > + *
> > > + *  - @id = 10
> > > + *  - @name = foobar
> > > + *  - @flags = 0
> > > + *  - @size_in = -1
> > > + *  - @size_out = 0
> > > + *
> > > + * See struct cxl_mem_query_commands.
> > > + */
> > > +struct cxl_command_info {
> > > +       __u32 id;
> > > +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_INVALID 0
> > > +
> > > +       __u32 flags;
> > > +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_NONE 0
> > > +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_TAINT BIT(0)
> > > +
> > > +       __s32 size_in;
> > > +       __s32 size_out;
> > > +
> > > +       char name[32];
> >
> > Why does the name for a command need to be shuffled back and forth
> > over the ioctl interface. Can't this be handled by a static lookup
> > table defined in the header?
> >
>
> I was thinking of cases where the userspace application doesn't match the
> current kernel's UAPI and giving the driver flexibility to return whatever.

How / why would the application by looking at @name for UAPI compatibility?

> OTTOMH, I also can't think of a way to do this if you want to do define the
> table sparsely though. Do you have ideas for that?

I don't think the name lookup would be sparse. i.e. it would be ok for
mem_commands to not have an entry for everything in the name lookup
table. As for defining the table it could use C preprocessor trick
popularized by Steven Rostedt:

#define CMDS                                                     \
        C(CMD1, "command one"),     \
        C(CMD2, "command two")     \
#undef C
#define C(a, b) a
enum commands_enum { CMDS };
#undef C
#define C(a, b) { b }
static struct {
        const char *name;
} commands[] = { CMDS };
#undef C

...then there's no way for the command ids to get out of sync with the names.