Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-69266-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231226200205.562565-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
 <20231226200205.562565-11-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> <20240213131210.GA28926@willie-the-truck>
 <CA+CK2bB4Z+z8tocO79AdsAy+gmN_4aVHgFUsm_gYLUJ2zV1A6A@mail.gmail.com> <20240216175752.GB2374@willie-the-truck>
In-Reply-To: <20240216175752.GB2374@willie-the-truck>
From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 14:48:00 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+CK2bDURTkZFo9uE9Bgfrz-NwgXqo4SAzLOW6Jb35M+eqUEaA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/10] iommu: account IOMMU allocated memory
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, alim.akhtar@samsung.com, alyssa@rosenzweig.io, 
	asahi@lists.linux.dev, baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, bhelgaas@google.com, 
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, david@redhat.com, 
	dwmw2@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, heiko@sntech.de, 
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, jernej.skrabec@gmail.com, jonathanh@nvidia.com, 
	joro@8bytes.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, 
	linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com, marcan@marcan.st, 
	mhiramat@kernel.org, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, paulmck@kernel.org, 
	rdunlap@infradead.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, samuel@sholland.org, 
	suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, sven@svenpeter.dev, thierry.reding@gmail.com, 
	tj@kernel.org, tomas.mudrunka@gmail.com, vdumpa@nvidia.com, wens@csie.org, 
	yu-cheng.yu@intel.com, rientjes@google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 12:58=E2=80=AFPM Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> wrot=
e:
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 10:44:53AM -0500, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> > > >  SecPageTables
> > > > -              Memory consumed by secondary page tables, this curre=
ntly
> > > > -              currently includes KVM mmu allocations on x86 and ar=
m64.
> > > > +              Memory consumed by secondary page tables, this curre=
ntly includes
> > > > +              KVM mmu and IOMMU allocations on x86 and arm64.
> >
> > Hi Will,
> >
> > > While I can see the value in this for IOMMU mappings managed by VFIO,
> > > doesn't this end up conflating that with the normal case of DMA domai=
ns?
> > > For systems that e.g. rely on an IOMMU for functional host DMA, it se=
ems
> > > wrong to subject that to accounting constraints.
> >
> > The accounting constraints are only applicable when GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT
> > is passed to the iommu mapping functions. We do that from the vfio,
> > iommufd, and vhost. Without this flag, the memory useage is reported
> > in /proc/meminfo as part of  SecPageTables field, but not constrained
> > in cgroup.
>
> Thanks, Pasha, that explanation makes sense. I still find it bizarre to
> include IOMMU allocations from the DMA API in SecPageTables though, and
> I worry that it will confuse people who are using that metric as a way
> to get a feeling for how much memory is being used by KVM's secondary
> page-tables. As an extreme example, having a non-zero SecPageTables count
> without KVM even compiled in is pretty bizarre.

I agree; I also prefer a new field in /proc/meminfo named
'IOMMUPageTables'. This is what I proposed at LPC, but I was asked to
reuse the existing 'SecPageTables' field instead. The rationale was
that 'secondary' implies not only KVM page tables, but any other
non-regular page tables.

I would appreciate the opinion of IOMMU maintainers on this: is it
preferable to bundle the information with 'SecPageTables' or maintain
a separate field?

Pasha