Hi BaoLu,
On Sun, 1 May 2022 19:24:32 +0800, Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com>
wrote:
> As domain->force_snooping only impacts the devices attached with the
> domain, there's no need to check against all IOMMU units. At the same
> time, for a brand new domain (hasn't been attached to any device), the
> force_snooping field could be set, but the attach_dev callback will
> return failure if it wants to attach to a device which IOMMU has no
> snoop control capability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.h | 2 ++
> drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c | 18 +++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.h b/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.h
> index ab4408c824a5..583ea67fc783 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.h
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.h
> @@ -123,4 +123,6 @@ void intel_pasid_tear_down_entry(struct intel_iommu
> *iommu, bool fault_ignore);
> int vcmd_alloc_pasid(struct intel_iommu *iommu, u32 *pasid);
> void vcmd_free_pasid(struct intel_iommu *iommu, u32 pasid);
> +void intel_pasid_setup_page_snoop_control(struct intel_iommu *iommu,
> + struct device *dev, u32 pasid);
> #endif /* __INTEL_PASID_H */
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
> index 98050943d863..3c1c228f9031 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
> @@ -4554,13 +4554,61 @@ static phys_addr_t
> intel_iommu_iova_to_phys(struct iommu_domain *domain, return phys;
> }
>
> +static bool domain_support_force_snooping(struct dmar_domain *domain)
> +{
> + struct device_domain_info *info;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + bool support = true;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&device_domain_lock, flags);
> + if (list_empty(&domain->devices))
> + goto out;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(info, &domain->devices, link) {
> + if (!ecap_sc_support(info->iommu->ecap)) {
> + support = false;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
why not just check the flag dmar_domain->force_snooping? devices wouldn't
be able to attach if !ecap_sc, right?
> +out:
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&device_domain_lock, flags);
> + return support;
> +}
> +
> +static void domain_set_force_snooping(struct dmar_domain *domain)
> +{
> + struct device_domain_info *info;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + /*
> + * Second level page table supports per-PTE snoop control. The
> + * iommu_map() interface will handle this by setting SNP bit.
> + */
> + if (!domain_use_first_level(domain))
> + return;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&device_domain_lock, flags);
> + if (list_empty(&domain->devices))
> + goto out_unlock;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(info, &domain->devices, link)
> + intel_pasid_setup_page_snoop_control(info->iommu,
> info->dev,
> + PASID_RID2PASID);
> +
I guess other DMA API PASIDs need to have sc bit set as well. I will keep
this in mind for my DMA API PASID patch.
> +out_unlock:
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&device_domain_lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> static bool intel_iommu_enforce_cache_coherency(struct iommu_domain
> *domain) {
> struct dmar_domain *dmar_domain = to_dmar_domain(domain);
>
> - if (!domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL))
> + if (!domain_support_force_snooping(dmar_domain))
> return false;
> +
> + domain_set_force_snooping(dmar_domain);
> dmar_domain->force_snooping = true;
> +
nit: spurious change
> return true;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c
> index f8d215d85695..815c744e6a34 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c
> @@ -762,3 +762,21 @@ int intel_pasid_setup_pass_through(struct
> intel_iommu *iommu,
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * Set the page snoop control for a pasid entry which has been set up.
> + */
> +void intel_pasid_setup_page_snoop_control(struct intel_iommu *iommu,
> + struct device *dev, u32 pasid)
> +{
> + struct pasid_entry *pte;
> + u16 did;
> +
> + pte = intel_pasid_get_entry(dev, pasid);
> + if (WARN_ON(!pte || !pasid_pte_is_present(pte)))
> + return;
> +
> + pasid_set_pgsnp(pte);
> + did = pasid_get_domain_id(pte);
> + pasid_flush_caches(iommu, pte, pasid, did);
> +}
Thanks,
Jacob
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
