Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D02DC636CC for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 11:12:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230410AbjBPLMc (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Feb 2023 06:12:32 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37394 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229947AbjBPLMa (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Feb 2023 06:12:30 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B385283F7 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 03:12:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id hg24-20020a05600c539800b003e1f5f2a29cso3859122wmb.4 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 03:12:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=om86lkZfJsY4anvwokkpK35xQ29f8CqUJvo8NLWwWIc=; b=b7Di8OKegz1NYy+ugYqHyN5vi1A78FcTbBM2sZ11SQcIHppc3NYDsu2TCY0dOc+n6f 7So+jsquf5asNx1ZUb5BiiEjHkduo0Kswx5zVG9Y2yz8He9MzEf5tAAP+au/s6F+OWzV WEgoO90M5DAQ6ta0zxMQIcZKU+JhfYuyzhF3DAZvhKaMFFZMPdQtv8s3q8ud3i/mFCQX 2iKXFQ5VjeyRTFX1qZ8C1KQC/aB6FrxB2ghYOJB6y1y5RWDWefMiMi+gThQv17foHDBr p6RxHAenlih3jV///aQ+ojoFKixPfvcd6JFiCuEdqXCUeVbT304GtKP0HPQd3usA5mXT TG0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=om86lkZfJsY4anvwokkpK35xQ29f8CqUJvo8NLWwWIc=; b=vOufElziBFgq+yEnw+VnA/ScP0EFn8JJoxJYYCkZMvDhsqnXLc6ecmp303U+EAiIb4 YprvW2XOjVKGC5jwQrDayHtWukgIH29QQ+wEDLni0cDajOLysixvk5R4d3xzr9YMh1wr vB/7y+adgElyJYxwxn8b870U1KbCIwZdpZPrE+LLra6Gwrw5/yCE/F1WVjvAT/faX/CZ IDY2PhmdishTmAW+o/IkOWjYPHaElGKpIajlDMgPTs6XiP3VKt3J78qtmH8C7aRHwFoT fE8AbySdmp7zu1vub+ZqxLm2QOiRAcLgm6XtWa3MbZ/11juBcx8g7u7ee2Tj3QtIMloy QGOg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWpOygi2LC1Ib5v2sa7KCX8JiN9x9YAbrs5VJ6/Pd13ryr32yiS 57tPATJot0cCjrA74GVIrdDqew== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/uPweYVu6MAtPL+QX+e4WnluRTA8Ib+OTCn3hxd/IgE0ct5FP6T04lRolBRQ2LyvEUj7LOTg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:746:b0:3de:d52:2cd2 with SMTP id j6-20020a05600c074600b003de0d522cd2mr4376053wmn.4.1676545946170; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 03:12:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from myrica (054592b0.skybroadband.com. [5.69.146.176]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o10-20020a1c750a000000b003dc4aae4739sm4841874wmc.27.2023.02.16.03.12.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Feb 2023 03:12:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2023 11:12:24 +0000 From: Jean-Philippe Brucker To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Leon Romanovsky , Ganapatrao Kulkarni , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, darren@os.amperecomputing.com, scott@os.amperecomputing.com, Will Deacon , Robin Murphy , Joerg Roedel , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/ATS: Allow to enable ATS on VFs even if it is not enabled on PF Message-ID: References: <20230215205726.GA3213227@bhelgaas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230215205726.GA3213227@bhelgaas> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 02:57:26PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > [+cc Will, Robin, Joerg for arm-smmu-v3 page size question] > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 08:14:48PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 10:43:21AM -0800, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote: > > > As per PCIe specification(section 10.5), If a VF implements an > > > ATS capability, its associated PF must implement an ATS capability. > > > The ATS Capabilities in VFs and their associated PFs are permitted to > > > be enabled independently. > > > Also, it states that the Smallest Translation Unit (STU) for VFs must be > > > hardwired to Zero and the associated PF's value applies to VFs STU. > > > > > > The current code allows to enable ATS on VFs only if it is already > > > enabled on associated PF, which is not necessary as per the specification. > > > > > > It is only required to have valid STU programmed on PF to enable > > > ATS on VFs. Adding code to write the first VFs STU to a PF's STU > > > when PFs ATS is not enabled. > > > > Can you please add here quotes from the spec and its version? I don't see > > anything like this in my version of PCIe specification. > > See PCIe r6.0, sec 10.5.1. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/ats.c | 15 +++++++++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/ats.c b/drivers/pci/ats.c > > > index f9cc2e10b676..a97ec67201d1 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/ats.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/ats.c > > > @@ -67,13 +67,20 @@ int pci_enable_ats(struct pci_dev *dev, int ps) > > > if (ps < PCI_ATS_MIN_STU) > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > > > - /* > > > - * Note that enabling ATS on a VF fails unless it's already enabled > > > - * with the same STU on the PF. > > > - */ > > > ctrl = PCI_ATS_CTRL_ENABLE; > > > if (dev->is_virtfn) { > > > pdev = pci_physfn(dev); > > > + > > > + if (!pdev->ats_enabled && > > > + (pdev->ats_stu < PCI_ATS_MIN_STU)) { > > > + u16 ctrl2; > > > + > > > + /* Associated PF's STU value applies to VFs. */ > > > + pdev->ats_stu = ps; > > > + ctrl2 = PCI_ATS_CTRL_STU(pdev->ats_stu - PCI_ATS_MIN_STU); > > > + pci_write_config_word(pdev, pdev->ats_cap + PCI_ATS_CTRL, ctrl2); > > > + } > > For reference, it is this way because of edc90fee916b ("PCI: Allocate > ATS struct during enumeration"). The rationale was that since the PF > STU applies to all VFs, we should require that the PF STU be > programmed before enabling ATS on any of the VFs. > > This patch relaxes that so the PF STU would be set either by (a) > enabling ATS on the PF or (b) enabling ATS on the first VF. > > This looks racy because theoretically drivers for VF A and VF B could > independently call pci_enable_ats() with different IOMMU page sizes, > and we don't know which will get there first. > > Most callers supply a compile-time constant (PAGE_SHIFT or > VTD_PAGE_SHIFT), so it won't matter. arm_smmu_enable_ats() is > fancier, but I *assume* it would still supply the same IOMMU page size > for all VFs of a given PF. > > But it's still kind of ugly to call pci_enable_ats(dev_A) and have it > muck with the configuration of dev_B. Maybe we should configure the > PF STU (without enabling ATS) at enumeration-time in pci_ats_init()? > Is there some way to get the IOMMU page size at that time? Not really, on Arm the supported page sizes are discovered when probing the SMMU registers, which may happen later than enumeration, during module loading. What this patch is trying to solve is: * want the PF to bypass SMMU translation, and the VF to undergo SMMU translation (in order to assign it to a VM) * SMMU forbids enabling ATS for a configuration that bypasses translation. So the PF ATS capability must be left disabled. For this situation I wonder if we could do: the SMMU driver, seeing that the PF is configured to bypass, calls a new function "pci_configure_ats()" instead of pci_enable_ats(), which would only set the STU but leave the cap disabled. Then when setting up translation for the VF, the SMMU driver calls pci_enable_ats() as usual, which sees the PF's STU set appropriately and succeeds. Thanks, Jean