Hi jean, Jacob,

On 3/21/19 3:13 PM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 21/03/2019 13:54, Auger Eric wrote:
>> Hi Jacob, Jean-Philippe,
>>
>> On 3/20/19 5:50 PM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>>> On 20/03/2019 16:37, Jacob Pan wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> +struct iommu_inv_addr_info {
>>>>> +#define IOMMU_INV_ADDR_FLAGS_PASID       (1 << 0)
>>>>> +#define IOMMU_INV_ADDR_FLAGS_ARCHID      (1 << 1)
>>>>> +#define IOMMU_INV_ADDR_FLAGS_LEAF        (1 << 2)
>>>>> + __u32   flags;
>>>>> + __u32   archid;
>>>>> + __u64   pasid;
>>>>> + __u64   addr;
>>>>> + __u64   granule_size;
>>>>> + __u64   nb_granules;
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * First level/stage invalidation information
>>>>> + * @cache: bitfield that allows to select which caches to invalidate
>>>>> + * @granularity: defines the lowest granularity used for the
>>>>> invalidation:
>>>>> + *     domain > pasid > addr
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * Not all the combinations of cache/granularity make sense:
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + *         type |   DEV_IOTLB   |     IOTLB     |      PASID    |
>>>>> + * granularity   |               |               |
>>>>> cache     |
>>>>> + * -------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
>>>>> + * DOMAIN        |       N/A     |       Y       |
>>>>> Y |
>>>>> + * PASID |       Y       |       Y       |
>>>>> Y |
>>>>> + * ADDR          |       Y       |       Y       |
>>>>> N/A       |
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +struct iommu_cache_invalidate_info {
>>>>> +#define IOMMU_CACHE_INVALIDATE_INFO_VERSION_1 1
>>>>> + __u32   version;
>>>>> +/* IOMMU paging structure cache */
>>>>> +#define IOMMU_CACHE_INV_TYPE_IOTLB       (1 << 0) /* IOMMU IOTLB */
>>>>> +#define IOMMU_CACHE_INV_TYPE_DEV_IOTLB   (1 << 1) /* Device
>>>>> IOTLB */ +#define IOMMU_CACHE_INV_TYPE_PASID      (1 << 2) /* PASID
>>>>> cache */
>>>> Just a clarification, this used to be an enum. You do intend to issue a
>>>> single invalidation request on multiple cache types? Perhaps for
>>>> virtio-IOMMU? I only see a single cache type in your patch #14. For VT-d
>>>> we plan to issue one cache type at a time for now. So this format works
>>>> for us.
>>>
>>> Yes for virtio-iommu I'd like as little overhead as possible, which
>>> means a single invalidation message to hit both IOTLB and ATC at once,
>>> and the ability to specify multiple pages with @nb_granules.
>> The original request/explanation from Jean-Philippe can be found here:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/1/28/1497
>>
>>>
>>>> However, if multiple cache types are issued in a single invalidation.
>>>> They must share a single granularity, not all combinations are valid.
>>>> e.g. dev IOTLB does not support domain granularity. Just a reminder,
>>>> not an issue. Driver could filter out invalid combinations.
>> Sure I will add a comment about this restriction.
>>>
>>> Agreed. Even the core could filter out invalid combinations based on the
>>> table above: IOTLB and domain granularity are N/A.
>> I don't get this sentence. What about vtd IOTLB domain-selective
>> invalidation:
> 
> My mistake: I meant dev-IOTLB and domain granularity are N/A

Ah OK, no worries.

How do we proceed further with those user APIs? Besides the comment to
be added above and previous suggestion from Jean ("Invalidations by
@granularity use field ...), have we reached a consensus now on:

- attach/detach_pasid_table
- cache_invalidate
- fault data and fault report API?

If not, please let me know.

Thanks

Eric


> 
> Thanks,
> Jean
> 
>> "
>> • IOTLB entries caching mappings associated with the specified domain-id
>> are invalidated.
>> • Paging-structure-cache entries caching mappings associated with the
>> specified domain-id are invalidated.
>> "
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jean
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> + __u8    cache;
>>>>> + __u8    granularity;
>>>>> + __u8    padding[2];
>>>>> + union {
>>>>> +         __u64   pasid;
>>>>> +         struct iommu_inv_addr_info addr_info;
>>>>> + };
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +
>>>>>  #endif /* _UAPI_IOMMU_H */
>>>>
>>>> [Jacob Pan]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> iommu mailing list
>>>> iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> iommu mailing list
>> iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
>>
> 
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu

Reply via email to