Re: [PATCH] iommu/mediatek: Move the tlb_sync into tlb_flush
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2019-09-30 12:09:35
Also in:
linux-iommu, linux-mediatek, lkml
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 01:42:22PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:
The commit 4d689b619445 ("iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: Convert to IOMMU API
TLB sync") help move the tlb_sync of unmap from v7s into the iommu
framework. It helps add a new function "mtk_iommu_iotlb_sync", But it
lacked the dom->pgtlock, then it will cause the variable
"tlb_flush_active" may be changed unexpectedly, we could see this warning
log randomly:
mtk-iommu 10205000.iommu: Partial TLB flush timed out, falling back to
full flush
To fix this issue, we can add dom->pgtlock in the "mtk_iommu_iotlb_sync".
And when checking this issue, we find that __arm_v7s_unmap call
io_pgtable_tlb_add_flush consecutively when it is supersection/largepage,
this also is potential unsafe for us. There is no tlb flush queue in the
MediaTek M4U HW. The HW always expect the tlb_flush/tlb_sync one by one.
If v7s don't always gurarantee the sequence, Thus, In this patch I move
the tlb_sync into tlb_flush(also rename the function deleting "_nosync").
and we don't care if it is leaf, rearrange the callback functions. Also,
the tlb flush/sync was already finished in v7s, then iotlb_sync and
iotlb_sync_all is unnecessary.
Besides, there are two minor changes:
a) Use writel for the register F_MMU_INV_RANGE which is for triggering the
HW work. We expect all the setting(iova_start/iova_end...) have already
been finished before F_MMU_INV_RANGE.
b) Reduce the tlb timeout value from 100000us to 1000us. the original value
is so long that affect the multimedia performance.
Fixes: 4d689b619445 ("iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: Convert to IOMMU API TLB sync")
Signed-off-by: Chao Hao <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com>
---
This patch looks break the logic for tlb_flush and tlb_sync. I'm not
sure if it
is reasonable. If someone has concern, I could change:
a) Add dom->pgtlock in the mtk_iommu_iotlb_sync
b) Add a io_pgtable_tlb_sync in [1].The patch looks ok to me, but please could you split it up so that the timeout and writel are done separately? Thanks, Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel