Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pre-allocate a per-master invalidation array
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2025-11-24 21:43:01
Also in:
linux-iommu, lkml
On Sat, Nov 08, 2025 at 12:08:05AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
When a master is attached from an old domain to a new domain, it needs to build an invalidation array to delete and add the array entries from/onto the invalidation arrays of those two domains, passed via the to_merge and to_unref arguments into arm_smmu_invs_merge/unref() respectively. Since the master->num_streams might differ across masters, a memory would have to be allocated when building an to_merge/to_unref array which might fail with -ENOMEM. On the other hand, an attachment to arm_smmu_blocked_domain must not fail so it's the best to avoid any memory allocation in that path. Pre-allocate a fixed size invalidation array for every master. This array will be used as a scratch to fill dynamically when building a to_merge or to_unref invs array. Sort fwspec->ids in an ascending order to fit to the arm_smmu_invs_merge() function. Co-developed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <redacted> --- drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 8 ++++++ drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h index 757158b9ea655..7b81a82c0dfe4 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h@@ -922,6 +922,14 @@ struct arm_smmu_master { struct arm_smmu_device *smmu; struct device *dev; struct arm_smmu_stream *streams; + /* + * Scratch memory for a to_merge or to_unref array to build a per-domain + * invalidation array. It'll be pre-allocated with enough enries for all + * possible build scenarios. It can be used by only one caller at a time + * until the arm_smmu_invs_merge/unref() finishes. Must be locked by the + * iommu_group mutex. + */ + struct arm_smmu_invs *build_invs; struct arm_smmu_vmaster *vmaster; /* use smmu->streams_mutex */ /* Locked by the iommu core using the group mutex */ struct arm_smmu_ctx_desc_cfg cd_table;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 8266d0839a927..26b8492a13f20 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c@@ -3693,12 +3693,22 @@ static int arm_smmu_init_sid_strtab(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u32 sid) return 0; } +static int arm_smmu_ids_cmp(const void *_l, const void *_r) +{ + const typeof_member(struct iommu_fwspec, ids[0]) *l = _l; + const typeof_member(struct iommu_fwspec, ids[0]) *r = _r; + + return cmp_int(*l, *r); +} + static int arm_smmu_insert_master(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, struct arm_smmu_master *master) { int i; int ret = 0; struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec = dev_iommu_fwspec_get(master->dev); + bool ats_supported = dev_is_pci(master->dev) && + pci_ats_supported(to_pci_dev(master->dev)); master->streams = kcalloc(fwspec->num_ids, sizeof(*master->streams), GFP_KERNEL);@@ -3706,6 +3716,21 @@ static int arm_smmu_insert_master(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, return -ENOMEM; master->num_streams = fwspec->num_ids; + if (!ats_supported) { + /* Base case has 1 ASID entry or maximum 2 VMID entries */ + master->build_invs = arm_smmu_invs_alloc(2); + } else { + /* Put the ids into order for sorted to_merge/to_unref arrays */ + sort_nonatomic(fwspec->ids, fwspec->num_ids, + sizeof(fwspec->ids[0]), arm_smmu_ids_cmp, NULL); + /* ATS case adds num_ids of entries, on top of the base case */ + master->build_invs = arm_smmu_invs_alloc(2 + fwspec->num_ids);
Although I can't point at a specific issue here, I'm nervous about mutating the 'fwspec->ids' array from within the driver, The array isn't allocated or populated directly by the driver and so I don't think we really have any business sorting it. Could we hack iommu_fwspec_add_ids() to keep the array ordered instead? Will