Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:4 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:4;
Date:   Wed, 6 Dec 2023 16:23:25 +0000
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, ankita@nvidia.com,
        Shameerali Kolothum Thodi 
        <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>, oliver.upton@linux.dev,
        suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, will@kernel.org,
        ardb@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, gshan@redhat.com,
        aniketa@nvidia.com, cjia@nvidia.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com,
        targupta@nvidia.com, vsethi@nvidia.com, acurrid@nvidia.com,
        apopple@nvidia.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, danw@nvidia.com,
        mochs@nvidia.com, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] KVM: arm64: allow the VM to select DEVICE_* and
 NORMAL_NC for IO memory
Message-ID: <ZXCf_e-ACqrj6VrV@arm.com>
References: <ZW8MP2tDt4_9ROBz@arm.com>
 <20231205130517.GD2692119@nvidia.com>
 <ZW9OSe8Z9gAmM7My@arm.com>
 <20231205164318.GG2692119@nvidia.com>
 <ZW949Tl3VmQfPk0L@arm.com>
 <20231205194822.GL2692119@nvidia.com>
 <ZXCJ3pVbKuHJ3LTz@arm.com>
 <20231206150556.GQ2692119@nvidia.com>
 <ZXCQrTbf6q0BIhSw@lpieralisi>
 <20231206153809.GS2692119@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231206153809.GS2692119@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 11:38:09AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 04:18:05PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 11:05:56AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 02:49:02PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > BTW, on those Mellanox devices that require different attributes within
> > > > a BAR, do they have a problem with speculative reads causing
> > > > side-effects? 
> > > 
> > > Yes. We definitely have had that problem in the past on older
> > > devices. VFIO must map the BAR using pgprot_device/noncached() into
> > > the VMM, no other choice is functionally OK.
> > 
> > Were those BARs tagged as prefetchable or non-prefetchable ? I assume the
> > latter but please let me know if I am guessing wrong.
> 
> I don't know it was quite old HW. Probably.
> 
> Just because a BAR is not marked as prefetchable doesn't mean that the
> device can't use NORMAL_NC on subsets of it.

What about the other way around - would we have a prefetchable BAR that
has portions which are unprefetchable?

-- 
Catalin