On 30/01/2020 3:06 pm, Auger Eric wrote:

Hi Rob,
On 1/17/20 10:16 PM, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

Arm SMMUv3.2 adds support for TLB range invalidate operations.
Support for range invalidate is determined by the RIL bit in the IDR3
register.

The range invalidate is in units of the leaf page size and operates on
1-32 chunks of a power of 2 multiple pages. First, we determine from the
size what power of 2 multiple we can use. Then we calculate how many
chunks (1-31) of the power of 2 size for the range on the iteration. On
each iteration, we move up in size by at least 5 bits.

Cc: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker <redacted>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
---
  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
  1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index e91b4a098215..0ee561db7149 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c

@@ -70,6 +70,9 @@
  #define IDR1_SSIDSIZE			GENMASK(10, 6)
  #define IDR1_SIDSIZE			GENMASK(5, 0)
  
+#define ARM_SMMU_IDR3			0xc
+#define IDR3_RIL			(1 << 10)
+
  #define ARM_SMMU_IDR5			0x14
  #define IDR5_STALL_MAX			GENMASK(31, 16)
  #define IDR5_GRAN64K			(1 << 6)

@@ -327,9 +330,14 @@
  #define CMDQ_CFGI_1_LEAF		(1UL << 0)
  #define CMDQ_CFGI_1_RANGE		GENMASK_ULL(4, 0)
  
+#define CMDQ_TLBI_0_NUM			GENMASK_ULL(16, 12)
+#define CMDQ_TLBI_RANGE_NUM_MAX		31
+#define CMDQ_TLBI_0_SCALE		GENMASK_ULL(24, 20)
  #define CMDQ_TLBI_0_VMID		GENMASK_ULL(47, 32)
  #define CMDQ_TLBI_0_ASID		GENMASK_ULL(63, 48)
  #define CMDQ_TLBI_1_LEAF		(1UL << 0)
+#define CMDQ_TLBI_1_TTL			GENMASK_ULL(9, 8)
+#define CMDQ_TLBI_1_TG			GENMASK_ULL(11, 10)
  #define CMDQ_TLBI_1_VA_MASK		GENMASK_ULL(63, 12)
  #define CMDQ_TLBI_1_IPA_MASK		GENMASK_ULL(51, 12)
  

@@ -455,9 +463,13 @@ struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent {
  		#define CMDQ_OP_TLBI_S2_IPA	0x2a
  		#define CMDQ_OP_TLBI_NSNH_ALL	0x30
  		struct {
+			u8			num;
+			u8			scale;
  			u16			asid;
  			u16			vmid;
  			bool			leaf;
+			u8			ttl;
+			u8			tg;
  			u64			addr;
  		} tlbi;
  

@@ -595,6 +607,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_device {
  #define ARM_SMMU_FEAT_HYP		(1 << 12)
  #define ARM_SMMU_FEAT_STALL_FORCE	(1 << 13)
  #define ARM_SMMU_FEAT_VAX		(1 << 14)
+#define ARM_SMMU_FEAT_RANGE_INV		(1 << 15)
  	u32				features;
  
  #define ARM_SMMU_OPT_SKIP_PREFETCH	(1 << 0)

@@ -856,13 +869,21 @@ static int arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd(u64 *cmd, struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent *ent)
  		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_CFGI_1_RANGE, 31);
  		break;
  	case CMDQ_OP_TLBI_NH_VA:
+		cmd[0] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_0_NUM, ent->tlbi.num);
+		cmd[0] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_0_SCALE, ent->tlbi.scale);
  		cmd[0] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_0_ASID, ent->tlbi.asid);
  		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_1_LEAF, ent->tlbi.leaf);
+		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_1_TTL, ent->tlbi.ttl);
+		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_1_TG, ent->tlbi.tg);
  		cmd[1] |= ent->tlbi.addr & CMDQ_TLBI_1_VA_MASK;
  		break;
  	case CMDQ_OP_TLBI_S2_IPA:
+		cmd[0] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_0_NUM, ent->tlbi.num);
+		cmd[0] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_0_SCALE, ent->tlbi.scale);
  		cmd[0] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_0_VMID, ent->tlbi.vmid);
  		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_1_LEAF, ent->tlbi.leaf);
+		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_1_TTL, ent->tlbi.ttl);
+		cmd[1] |= FIELD_PREP(CMDQ_TLBI_1_TG, ent->tlbi.tg);
  		cmd[1] |= ent->tlbi.addr & CMDQ_TLBI_1_IPA_MASK;
  		break;
  	case CMDQ_OP_TLBI_NH_ASID:

@@ -2003,7 +2024,7 @@ static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range(unsigned long iova, size_t size,
  {
  	u64 cmds[CMDQ_BATCH_ENTRIES * CMDQ_ENT_DWORDS];
  	struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
-	unsigned long start = iova, end = iova + size;
+	unsigned long start = iova, end = iova + size, num_pages = 0, tg = 0;
  	int i = 0;
  	struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent cmd = {
  		.tlbi = {

@@ -2022,12 +2043,50 @@ static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range(unsigned long iova, size_t size,
  		cmd.tlbi.vmid	= smmu_domain->s2_cfg.vmid;
  	}
  
+	if (smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_RANGE_INV) {
+		/* Get the leaf page size */
+		tg = __ffs(smmu_domain->domain.pgsize_bitmap);
+
+		/* Convert page size of 12,14,16 (log2) to 1,2,3 */
+		cmd.tlbi.tg = ((tg - ilog2(SZ_4K)) / 2) + 1;

Given the comment, I think "(tg - 10) / 2" would suffice ;)

quoted

+
+		/* Determine what level the granule is at */
+		cmd.tlbi.ttl = 4 - ((ilog2(granule) - 3) / (tg - 3));

Is it possible to rephrase that with logs and shifts to avoid the division?

quoted

+
+		num_pages = size / (1UL << tg);

Similarly, in my experience GCC has always seemed too cautious to elide 
non-constant division even in a seemingly-obvious case like this, so 
explicit "size >> tg" might be preferable.

quoted

+	}
+
  	while (iova < end) {
  		if (i == CMDQ_BATCH_ENTRIES) {
  			arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist(smmu, cmds, i, false);
  			i = 0;
  		}
  
+		if (smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_RANGE_INV) {
+			/*
+			 * On each iteration of the loop, the range is 5 bits
+			 * worth of the aligned size remaining.
+			 * The range in pages is:
+			 *
+			 * range = (num_pages & (0x1f << __ffs(num_pages)))
+			 */
+			unsigned long scale, num;
+
+			/* Determine the power of 2 multiple number of pages */
+			scale = __ffs(num_pages);
+			cmd.tlbi.scale = scale;
+
+			/* Determine how many chunks of 2^scale size we have */
+			num = (num_pages >> scale) & CMDQ_TLBI_RANGE_NUM_MAX;
+			cmd.tlbi.num = num - 1;
+
+			/* range is num * 2^scale * pgsize */
+			granule = num << (scale + tg);
+
+			/* Clear out the lower order bits for the next iteration */
+			num_pages -= num << scale;

Regarding the 2 options given in
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/CAL_JsqKABoE+0crGwyZdNogNgEoG=MOOpf6deQgH6s73c0UNdA@mail.gmail.com/raw (local),

I understand you implemented 2) but I still do not understand why you
preferred that one against 1).

In your case of 1023*4k pages this will invalidate by 31 32*2^0*4K +
31*2^0*4K pages
whereas you could achieve that with 10 invalidations with the 1st algo.
I did not get the case where it is more efficient. Please can you detail.

I guess essentially we want to solve for two variables to get a range as 
close to size as possible. There might be a more elegant numerical 
method, but for the numbers involved brute force is probably good enough 
for the real world. 5 minutes alone with the architecture spec and a 
blank editor begat this pseudo-implementation:

	size_t npages = size >> pgshift;
	while (npages) {
		unsigned long range;
		unsigned int delta, best = UINT_MAX;
		int num, scale = min(31, __ffs(npages));

		while (scale) {
			num = min(32, npages >> scale);
			if (num == 32)
				break;

			delta = npages & ((1 << scale) - 1);
			if (!delta || delta > best)
				break;

			best = delta;
			scale--;
		}

		//invalidate

		range = num << scale;
		npages -= range;
		iova += (range) << pgshift;
	}

Modulo any obvious thinkos, what do you reckon?

Also a question about TG. Reading the spec again & again, it is said
entries to be invalidated were inserted using this
Granule size. Here you pick the lowest granule supported by the domain.
Does it mean this was the one being used?

Yes - in arm_smmu_domain_finalise(), the domain's pgsize_bitmap is 
updated to reflect whichever granule alloc_io_pgtable_ops() actually picked.

Robin.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel