Re: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Set TTL invalidation hint better"
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2023-08-01 08:56:06
Also in:
linux-iommu, lkml
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 02:21:22PM +0800, wangwudi wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Rui Zhu <redacted> This reverts commit 6833b8f2e19945a41e4d5efd8c6d9f4cae9a5b7d. This constraint violates the protocol. When tg is not 0 but ttl, scale, and num are 0, the hardware reports the CERROR_IL gerror. In the protocol, leaf is not a prerequisite for TTL. Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> Cc: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> Cc: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com> Cc: Tomas Krcka <redacted> Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker <redacted> Cc: Nicolin Chen <redacted> Cc: Rui Zhu <redacted> Signed-off-by: Rui Zhu <redacted> --- drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c index 9b0dc3505601..098e84cfa82f 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c@@ -1898,13 +1898,8 @@ static void __arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range(struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent *cmd, /* Convert page size of 12,14,16 (log2) to 1,2,3 */ cmd->tlbi.tg = (tg - 10) / 2; - /* - * Determine what level the granule is at. For non-leaf, io-pgtable - * assumes .tlb_flush_walk can invalidate multiple levels at once, - * so ignore the nominal last-level granule and leave TTL=0. - */ - if (cmd->tlbi.leaf) - cmd->tlbi.ttl = 4 - ((ilog2(granule) - 3) / (tg - 3)); + /* Determine what level the granule is at */ + cmd->tlbi.ttl = 4 - ((ilog2(granule) - 3) / (tg - 3));
Doesn't this reintroduce the bug that 6833b8f2e199 tried to fix? afaict, we should only hit the problematic case of tg != 0 but ttl, scale and num all 0 if we're invalidating a single page, so shouldn't we just zap tg in that case, since it's not doing anything useful? I hesitate to say we should avoid range invalidation altogether for single-page invalidations because I think some errata workarounds might need that to work. Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel