On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 05:12:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:

On 05/01/2015 02:23 PM, David Gibson wrote:

quoted

On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 02:01:17PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:

quoted

On 04/29/2015 04:31 PM, David Gibson wrote:

quoted

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:14:50PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:

quoted

In order to support memory pre-registration, we need a way to track
the use of every registered memory region and only allow unregistration
if a region is not in use anymore. So we need a way to tell from what
region the just cleared TCE was from.

This adds a userspace view of the TCE table into iommu_table struct.
It contains userspace address, one per TCE entry. The table is only
allocated when the ownership over an IOMMU group is taken which means
it is only used from outside of the powernv code (such as VFIO).

Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <redacted>
---
Changes:
v9:
* fixed code flow in error cases added in v8

v8:
* added ENOMEM on failed vzalloc()
---
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/iommu.h          |  6 ++++++
 arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c               | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
 3 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/iommu.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/iommu.h
index 7694546..1472de3 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/iommu.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/iommu.h

@@ -111,9 +111,15 @@ struct iommu_table {
 	unsigned long *it_map;       /* A simple allocation bitmap for now */
 	unsigned long  it_page_shift;/* table iommu page size */
 	struct iommu_table_group *it_table_group;
+	unsigned long *it_userspace; /* userspace view of the table */

A single unsigned long doesn't seem like enough.

Why single? This is an array.

As in single per page.

Sorry, I am not following you here.
It is per IOMMU page. MAP/UNMAP work with IOMMU pages which are fully backed
with either system page or a huge page.

quoted

quoted

quoted

How do you know
which process's address space this address refers to?

It is a current task. Multiple userspaces cannot use the same container/tables.

Where is that enforced?

It is accessed from VFIO DMA map/unmap which are ioctls() to a container's
fd which is per a process.

Usually, but what enforces that.  If you open a container fd, then
fork(), and attempt to map from both parent and child, what happens?

Same for KVM - when it registers IOMMU groups in
KVM, fd's of opened IOMMU groups are passed there. Or I did not understand
the question...

quoted

More to the point, that's a VFIO constraint, but it's here affecting
the design of a structure owned by the platform code.

Right. But keeping in mind KVM, I cannot think of any better design here.

quoted

[snip]

quoted

quoted

quoted

 static void pnv_pci_ioda_setup_opal_tce_kill(struct pnv_phb *phb,

@@ -2062,12 +2071,21 @@ static long pnv_pci_ioda2_create_table(struct iommu_table_group *table_group,
 	int nid = pe->phb->hose->node;
 	__u64 bus_offset = num ? pe->tce_bypass_base : 0;
 	long ret;
+	unsigned long *uas, uas_cb = sizeof(*uas) * (window_size >> page_shift);
+
+	uas = vzalloc(uas_cb);
+	if (!uas)
+		return -ENOMEM;

I don't see why this is allocated both here as well as in
take_ownership.

Where else? The only alternative is vfio_iommu_spapr_tce but I really do not
want to touch iommu_table fields there.

Well to put it another way, why isn't take_ownership calling create
itself (or at least a common helper).

I am trying to keep DDW stuff away from platform-oriented
arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c which main purpose is to implement
iommu_alloc()&co. It already has

I'd rather move it_userspace allocation completely to vfio_iommu_spapr_tce
(should have done earlier, actually), would this be ok?

Yeah, that makes more sense to me.

quoted

Clearly the it_userspace table needs to have lifetime which matches
the TCE table itself, so there should be a single function that marks
the beginning of that joint lifetime.

No. it_userspace lives as long as the platform code does not control the
table. For IODA2 it is equal for the lifetime of the table, for IODA1/P5IOC2
it is not.

Right, I was imprecise.  I was thinking of the ownership change as an
end/beginning of lifetime even for IODA1, because the table has to be
fully cleared at that point, even though it's not actually
reallocated.

quoted

quoted

quoted

Isn't this function used for core-kernel users of the
iommu as well, in which case it shouldn't need the it_userspace.

No. This is an iommu_table_group_ops callback which calls what the platform
code calls (pnv_pci_create_table()) plus allocates this it_userspace thing.
The callback is only called from VFIO.

Ok.

As touched on above it seems more like this should be owned by VFIO
code than the platform code.

Agree now :) I'll move the allocation to VFIO. Thanks!

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson