Re: [PATCH rc v6 3/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Mark STE EATS safe when computing the update sequence
From: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
Date: 2026-01-14 16:59:08
Also in:
linux-iommu, lkml
On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 12:15:57PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 03:58:03PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:quoted
quoted
+ + /* + * When a STE comes to change EATS the sequencing code in the attach + * logic already will have the PCI cap for ATS disabled. Thus at this + * moment we can expect that the device will not generate ATS queries + * and so we don't care about the sequencing of EATS. The purpose of + * EATS is to protect the system from hostile untrusted devices that + * issue ATS when the PCI config space is disabled. However, if EATS + * is being changed then we already must be trusting the device since + * the EATS security block is being disabled. + * + * Note: Since we moved the EATS update to the first phase, changing + * S2S and EATS might transiently set S2S=1 and EATS=1, resulting in + * a bad STE. See "5.2 Stream Table Entry". In such a case, we can't + * do a hitless update. + */ + if (!((cur[2] | target[2]) & cpu_to_le64(STRTAB_STE_2_S2S))) + safe_bits[1] |= cpu_to_le64(STRTAB_STE_1_EATS);I understand what we're trying to do here but isn't this implicitly saying it is safe to transition hitlessly to any non-zero EATS value, including S1CHK or RSVD. S1CHK might have other config dependencies?Will pointed this issue with S1CHK, Nicolin has a suggestion to fix it here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/aWarF90zBqxD0Gef@Asurada-Nvidia/ (local) It would block RSVD too.
Ohh okay, sounds good then, my client dropped it somehow. I'll defer this to Will.
Thanks, Jason
Thanks, Praan