Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 9 Aug 2023 14:50:13 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To:     Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
Cc:     iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
        nicolinc@nvidia.com, jgg@nvidia.com, jean-philippe@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Skip cd sync if CD table isn't
 active
Message-ID: <20230809135011.GC4226@willie-the-truck>
References: <20230808171446.2187795-1-mshavit@google.com>
 <20230809011204.v5.8.Idedc0f496231e2faab3df057219c5e2d937bbfe4@changeid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230809011204.v5.8.Idedc0f496231e2faab3df057219c5e2d937bbfe4@changeid>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 01:12:04AM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> This commit explicitly keeps track of whether a CD table is installed in
> an STE so that arm_smmu_sync_cd can skip the sync when unnecessary. This
> was previously achieved through the domain->devices list, but we are
> moving to a model where arm_smmu_sync_cd directly operates on a master
> and the master's CD table instead of a domain.

Why is this path worth optimising?

> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> index f5ad386cc8760..488d12dd2d4aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> @@ -985,6 +985,9 @@ static void arm_smmu_sync_cd(struct arm_smmu_master *master,
>  		},
>  	};
>  
> +	if (!master->cd_table.installed)
> +		return;

Doesn't this interact badly with the sync in arm_smmu_detach_dev(), which I
think happens after zapping the STE?

>  	cmds.num = 0;
>  	for (i = 0; i < master->num_streams; i++) {
>  		cmd.cfgi.sid = master->streams[i].id;
> @@ -1091,7 +1094,7 @@ int arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc(struct arm_smmu_master *master, int ssid,
>  		cdptr[3] = cpu_to_le64(cd->mair);
>  
>  		/*
> -		 * STE is live, and the SMMU might read dwords of this CD in any
> +		 * STE may be live, and the SMMU might read dwords of this CD in any
>  		 * order. Ensure that it observes valid values before reading
>  		 * V=1.
>  		 */

Why does this patch need to update this comment?

Will