> On Mar 17, 2021, at 2:35 AM, Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service > Product Dept.) <longpe...@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Nadav, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Nadav Amit [mailto:nadav.a...@gmail.com] >>> reproduce the problem with high probability (~50%). >> >> I saw Lu replied, and he is much more knowledgable than I am (I was just >> intrigued >> by your email). >> >> However, if I were you I would try also to remove some “optimizations” to >> look for >> the root-cause (e.g., use domain specific invalidations instead of >> page-specific). >> > > Good suggestion! But we did it these days, we tried to use global > invalidations as follow: > iommu->flush.flush_iotlb(iommu, did, 0, 0, > DMA_TLB_DSI_FLUSH); > But can not resolve the problem. > >> The first thing that comes to my mind is the invalidation hint (ih) in >> iommu_flush_iotlb_psi(). I would remove it to see whether you get the failure >> without it. > > We also notice the IH, but the IH is always ZERO in our case, as the spec > says: > ''' > Paging-structure-cache entries caching second-level mappings associated with > the specified > domain-id and the second-level-input-address range are invalidated, if the > Invalidation Hint > (IH) field is Clear. > ''' > > It seems the software is everything fine, so we've no choice but to suspect > the hardware.
Ok, I am pretty much out of ideas. I have two more suggestions, but they are much less likely to help. Yet, they can further help to rule out software bugs: 1. dma_clear_pte() seems to be wrong IMHO. It should have used WRITE_ONCE() to prevent split-write, which might potentially cause “invalid” (partially cleared) PTE to be stored in the TLB. Having said that, the subsequent IOTLB flush should have prevented the problem. 2. Consider ensuring that the problem is not somehow related to queued invalidations. Try to use __iommu_flush_iotlb() instead of qi_flush_iotlb(). Regards, Nadav
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
