From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> Date: 2021-06-18 16:26:51
Arm Fast Models are still implementing legacy virtio-pci devices behind
the SMMU, which continue to be problematic as "real hardware" devices
(from the point of view of the simulated system) without the mitigating
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM feature.
Since we now have the ability to force passthrough on a device-specific
basis, let's use it to work around this particular oddity so that people
who just want to boot Linux on a model don't have to fiddle around with
things to avoid the SMMU getting in the way by default (and I don't have
to keep telling them which things...)
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
---
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
@@ -2649,6 +2649,20 @@ static int arm_smmu_dev_disable_feature(struct device *dev,}}+staticintarm_smmu_def_domain_type(structdevice*dev)+{+if(dev_is_pci(dev)){+structpci_dev*pdev=to_pci_dev(dev);++/* Legacy virtio-block devices on Arm Fast Models */+if(pdev->vendor==0x1af4&&pdev->device==0x1001&&+pdev->subsystem_vendor==0x00ff&&pdev->subsystem_device==0x0002)+returnIOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;+}++return0;+}+staticstructiommu_opsarm_smmu_ops={.capable=arm_smmu_capable,.domain_alloc=arm_smmu_domain_alloc,
From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> Date: 2021-06-24 15:59:28
On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:24:49 +0100
Robin Murphy [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Robin,
Arm Fast Models are still implementing legacy virtio-pci devices behind
the SMMU, which continue to be problematic as "real hardware" devices
(from the point of view of the simulated system) without the mitigating
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM feature.
Since we now have the ability to force passthrough on a device-specific
basis, let's use it to work around this particular oddity so that people
who just want to boot Linux on a model don't have to fiddle around with
things to avoid the SMMU getting in the way by default (and I don't have
to keep telling them which things...)
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
So it looks somewhat quirky, but it indeed fixes the boot problems on
the RevC model for me.
And given that currently an out-of-the-box kernel build fails booting
(with the kernel DT), I'd like to see that merged.
Tested-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Thanks,
Andre
@@ -2649,6 +2649,20 @@ static int arm_smmu_dev_disable_feature(struct device *dev,}}+staticintarm_smmu_def_domain_type(structdevice*dev)+{+if(dev_is_pci(dev)){+structpci_dev*pdev=to_pci_dev(dev);++/* Legacy virtio-block devices on Arm Fast Models */+if(pdev->vendor==0x1af4&&pdev->device==0x1001&&+pdev->subsystem_vendor==0x00ff&&pdev->subsystem_device==0x0002)+returnIOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;+}++return0;+}+staticstructiommu_opsarm_smmu_ops={.capable=arm_smmu_capable,.domain_alloc=arm_smmu_domain_alloc,
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Date: 2021-06-29 17:36:13
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 05:24:49PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
Arm Fast Models are still implementing legacy virtio-pci devices behind
the SMMU, which continue to be problematic as "real hardware" devices
(from the point of view of the simulated system) without the mitigating
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM feature.
Since we now have the ability to force passthrough on a device-specific
basis, let's use it to work around this particular oddity so that people
who just want to boot Linux on a model don't have to fiddle around with
things to avoid the SMMU getting in the way by default (and I don't have
to keep telling them which things...)
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
---
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
Any chance of getting the fastmodels updated instead? It feels like it
has to happen *eventually*, and then there would be no need for this bodge.
Will
@@ -2649,6 +2649,20 @@ static int arm_smmu_dev_disable_feature(struct device *dev,}}+staticintarm_smmu_def_domain_type(structdevice*dev)+{+if(dev_is_pci(dev)){+structpci_dev*pdev=to_pci_dev(dev);++/* Legacy virtio-block devices on Arm Fast Models */+if(pdev->vendor==0x1af4&&pdev->device==0x1001&&+pdev->subsystem_vendor==0x00ff&&pdev->subsystem_device==0x0002)+returnIOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;+}++return0;+}+staticstructiommu_opsarm_smmu_ops={.capable=arm_smmu_capable,.domain_alloc=arm_smmu_domain_alloc,
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> Date: 2021-06-29 18:12:47
On 2021-06-29 18:34, Will Deacon wrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 05:24:49PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
quoted
Arm Fast Models are still implementing legacy virtio-pci devices behind
the SMMU, which continue to be problematic as "real hardware" devices
(from the point of view of the simulated system) without the mitigating
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM feature.
Since we now have the ability to force passthrough on a device-specific
basis, let's use it to work around this particular oddity so that people
who just want to boot Linux on a model don't have to fiddle around with
things to avoid the SMMU getting in the way by default (and I don't have
to keep telling them which things...)
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
---
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
Any chance of getting the fastmodels updated instead? It feels like it
has to happen *eventually*, and then there would be no need for this bodge.
If it's any consolation the JIRA ticket you raised in 2017 is still open...
Robin.
@@ -2649,6 +2649,20 @@ static int arm_smmu_dev_disable_feature(struct device *dev,}}+staticintarm_smmu_def_domain_type(structdevice*dev)+{+if(dev_is_pci(dev)){+structpci_dev*pdev=to_pci_dev(dev);++/* Legacy virtio-block devices on Arm Fast Models */+if(pdev->vendor==0x1af4&&pdev->device==0x1001&&+pdev->subsystem_vendor==0x00ff&&pdev->subsystem_device==0x0002)+returnIOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;+}++return0;+}+staticstructiommu_opsarm_smmu_ops={.capable=arm_smmu_capable,.domain_alloc=arm_smmu_domain_alloc,
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> Date: 2021-06-30 08:58:12
On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:34:40 +0100,
Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 05:24:49PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
quoted
Arm Fast Models are still implementing legacy virtio-pci devices behind
the SMMU, which continue to be problematic as "real hardware" devices
(from the point of view of the simulated system) without the mitigating
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM feature.
Since we now have the ability to force passthrough on a device-specific
basis, let's use it to work around this particular oddity so that people
who just want to boot Linux on a model don't have to fiddle around with
things to avoid the SMMU getting in the way by default (and I don't have
to keep telling them which things...)
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
---
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
Any chance of getting the fastmodels updated instead? It feels like it
has to happen *eventually*, and then there would be no need for this bodge.
That'd be ideal. What are the chances of that happening before the Sun
turns into a black hole?
@@ -2649,6 +2649,20 @@ static int arm_smmu_dev_disable_feature(struct device *dev,}}+staticintarm_smmu_def_domain_type(structdevice*dev)+{+if(dev_is_pci(dev)){+structpci_dev*pdev=to_pci_dev(dev);++/* Legacy virtio-block devices on Arm Fast Models */+if(pdev->vendor==0x1af4&&pdev->device==0x1001&&+pdev->subsystem_vendor==0x00ff&&pdev->subsystem_device==0x0002)+returnIOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;+}++return0;+}
Could this be expressed as a PCI quirk instead? It would at least keep
the ID matching out of the SMMU driver...
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> Date: 2021-06-30 11:08:44
On 2021-06-30 09:56, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:34:40 +0100,
Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 05:24:49PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
quoted
Arm Fast Models are still implementing legacy virtio-pci devices behind
the SMMU, which continue to be problematic as "real hardware" devices
(from the point of view of the simulated system) without the mitigating
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM feature.
Since we now have the ability to force passthrough on a device-specific
basis, let's use it to work around this particular oddity so that people
who just want to boot Linux on a model don't have to fiddle around with
things to avoid the SMMU getting in the way by default (and I don't have
to keep telling them which things...)
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
---
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
Any chance of getting the fastmodels updated instead? It feels like it
has to happen *eventually*, and then there would be no need for this bodge.
That'd be ideal. What are the chances of that happening before the Sun
turns into a black hole?
We'll try making some noise again internally and see where that goes,
but given the progress over the last 4 years I'd be inclined to posit a
new theory of the universe eventually ending in one giant event 0x10.
@@ -2649,6 +2649,20 @@ static int arm_smmu_dev_disable_feature(struct device *dev,}}+staticintarm_smmu_def_domain_type(structdevice*dev)+{+if(dev_is_pci(dev)){+structpci_dev*pdev=to_pci_dev(dev);++/* Legacy virtio-block devices on Arm Fast Models */+if(pdev->vendor==0x1af4&&pdev->device==0x1001&&+pdev->subsystem_vendor==0x00ff&&pdev->subsystem_device==0x0002)+returnIOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;+}++return0;+}
Could this be expressed as a PCI quirk instead? It would at least keep
the ID matching out of the SMMU driver...
I don't think so - getting the information from the PCI layer to the
IOMMU layer at the right place and time to influence the default domain
choice would seemingly need some uglier and even less popular
infrastructure adding. It's something that only the IOMMU layer has any
need to be aware of, and the def_domain_type callback essentially exists
for this kind of special-casing - compare intel-iommu's
device_def_domain_type() for example. If we accept a workaround at all,
I do believe this is the least-worst option.
Robin.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel