| Message ID | 20230905194849.v1.3.I211f2ab0ee241f53cdfbc3a8a573f14b8a46fb26@changeid (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Clean-up arm-smmu-v3-sva.c: remove arm_smmu_bond | expand |
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 07:49:14PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote: > Create a new iommu_domain subclass for SVA iommu domains to hold the > data previously stored in the dynamically allocated arm_smmu_bond. Add a > simple count of attached SVA domains to arm_smmu_master to replace the > list of bonds. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com> > --- > > .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c | 70 +++++++------------ > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 1 - > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > index 9fb6907c5e7d4..0342c0f35d55a 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > @@ -24,14 +24,13 @@ struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier { > > #define mn_to_smmu(mn) container_of(mn, struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier, mn) > > -struct arm_smmu_bond { > - struct mm_struct *mm; > +struct arm_smmu_sva_domain { > + struct iommu_domain iommu_domain; > struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier *smmu_mn; > - struct list_head list; > }; > > -#define sva_to_bond(handle) \ > - container_of(handle, struct arm_smmu_bond, sva) > +#define to_sva_domain(domain) \ > + container_of(domain, struct arm_smmu_sva_domain, iommu_domain) I'm not sure about this? This seems like a strange direction The SVA domain and a UNMANAGED/PAGING domain should be basically the same thing. Making a sva_domain a completely different type looks like it would stand in the way of that? > @@ -545,12 +526,11 @@ static const struct iommu_domain_ops arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops = { > > struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_sva_domain_alloc(void) > { > - struct iommu_domain *domain; > + struct arm_smmu_sva_domain *sva_domain; > > - domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain), GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!domain) > + sva_domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*sva_domain), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!sva_domain) > return NULL; > - domain->ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops; > - > - return domain; > + sva_domain->iommu_domain.ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops; arm_smmu_sva_domain_free() should container_of before freeing, but gross to assume the iommu_domain is the first member. Jason
On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:42 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 07:49:14PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote: > > Create a new iommu_domain subclass for SVA iommu domains to hold the > > data previously stored in the dynamically allocated arm_smmu_bond. Add a > > simple count of attached SVA domains to arm_smmu_master to replace the > > list of bonds. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com> > > --- > > > > .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c | 70 +++++++------------ > > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 1 - > > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 2 +- > > 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > > index 9fb6907c5e7d4..0342c0f35d55a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > > @@ -24,14 +24,13 @@ struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier { > > > > #define mn_to_smmu(mn) container_of(mn, struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier, mn) > > > > -struct arm_smmu_bond { > > - struct mm_struct *mm; > > +struct arm_smmu_sva_domain { > > + struct iommu_domain iommu_domain; > > struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier *smmu_mn; > > - struct list_head list; > > }; > > > > -#define sva_to_bond(handle) \ > > - container_of(handle, struct arm_smmu_bond, sva) > > +#define to_sva_domain(domain) \ > > + container_of(domain, struct arm_smmu_sva_domain, iommu_domain) > > I'm not sure about this? This seems like a strange direction > > The SVA domain and a UNMANAGED/PAGING domain should be basically the > same thing. Making a sva_domain a completely different type looks like > it would stand in the way of that? Agreed that's the eventual destination of all these re-works, but the stage isn't fully set for that yet. IMO this is a simpler improvement to get through for now, and I don't see it being an obstacle in the future. > > @@ -545,12 +526,11 @@ static const struct iommu_domain_ops arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops = { > > > > struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_sva_domain_alloc(void) > > { > > - struct iommu_domain *domain; > > + struct arm_smmu_sva_domain *sva_domain; > > > > - domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain), GFP_KERNEL); > > - if (!domain) > > + sva_domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*sva_domain), GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!sva_domain) > > return NULL; > > - domain->ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops; > > - > > - return domain; > > + sva_domain->iommu_domain.ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops; > > arm_smmu_sva_domain_free() should container_of before freeing, but > gross to assume the iommu_domain is the first member. Oh good catch I missed updating the free.
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 09:14:09PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote: > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:42 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 07:49:14PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote: > > > Create a new iommu_domain subclass for SVA iommu domains to hold the > > > data previously stored in the dynamically allocated arm_smmu_bond. Add a > > > simple count of attached SVA domains to arm_smmu_master to replace the > > > list of bonds. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com> > > > --- > > > > > > .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c | 70 +++++++------------ > > > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 1 - > > > drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 2 +- > > > 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > > > index 9fb6907c5e7d4..0342c0f35d55a 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c > > > @@ -24,14 +24,13 @@ struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier { > > > > > > #define mn_to_smmu(mn) container_of(mn, struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier, mn) > > > > > > -struct arm_smmu_bond { > > > - struct mm_struct *mm; > > > +struct arm_smmu_sva_domain { > > > + struct iommu_domain iommu_domain; > > > struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier *smmu_mn; > > > - struct list_head list; > > > }; > > > > > > -#define sva_to_bond(handle) \ > > > - container_of(handle, struct arm_smmu_bond, sva) > > > +#define to_sva_domain(domain) \ > > > + container_of(domain, struct arm_smmu_sva_domain, iommu_domain) > > > > I'm not sure about this? This seems like a strange direction > > > > The SVA domain and a UNMANAGED/PAGING domain should be basically the > > same thing. Making a sva_domain a completely different type looks like > > it would stand in the way of that? > > Agreed that's the eventual destination of all these re-works, but the > stage isn't fully set for that yet. IMO this is a simpler improvement > to get through for now, and I don't see it being an obstacle in the > future. Well, OK, you have the followup patches.. But I don't want to get in a spot where we continue to have "primary domains" for SVA.. Jason
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c index 9fb6907c5e7d4..0342c0f35d55a 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c @@ -24,14 +24,13 @@ struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier { #define mn_to_smmu(mn) container_of(mn, struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier, mn) -struct arm_smmu_bond { - struct mm_struct *mm; +struct arm_smmu_sva_domain { + struct iommu_domain iommu_domain; struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier *smmu_mn; - struct list_head list; }; -#define sva_to_bond(handle) \ - container_of(handle, struct arm_smmu_bond, sva) +#define to_sva_domain(domain) \ + container_of(domain, struct arm_smmu_sva_domain, iommu_domain) static DEFINE_MUTEX(sva_lock); @@ -318,10 +317,10 @@ static void arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_put(struct arm_smmu_mmu_notifier *smmu_mn) arm_smmu_free_shared_cd(cd); } -static int __arm_smmu_sva_bind(struct device *dev, struct mm_struct *mm) +static int __arm_smmu_sva_bind(struct device *dev, + struct arm_smmu_sva_domain *sva_domain, + struct mm_struct *mm) { - int ret; - struct arm_smmu_bond *bond; struct arm_smmu_master *master = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev); struct iommu_domain *domain = iommu_get_domain_for_dev(dev); struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain); @@ -329,24 +328,14 @@ static int __arm_smmu_sva_bind(struct device *dev, struct mm_struct *mm) if (!master || !master->sva_enabled) return -ENODEV; - bond = kzalloc(sizeof(*bond), GFP_KERNEL); - if (!bond) - return -ENOMEM; - - bond->mm = mm; - - bond->smmu_mn = arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_get(smmu_domain, mm); - if (IS_ERR(bond->smmu_mn)) { - ret = PTR_ERR(bond->smmu_mn); - goto err_free_bond; + sva_domain->smmu_mn = arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_get(smmu_domain, + mm); + if (IS_ERR(sva_domain->smmu_mn)) { + sva_domain->smmu_mn = NULL; + return PTR_ERR(sva_domain->smmu_mn); } - - list_add(&bond->list, &master->bonds); + master->nr_attached_sva_domains += 1; return 0; - -err_free_bond: - kfree(bond); - return ret; } bool arm_smmu_sva_supported(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu) @@ -476,7 +465,7 @@ int arm_smmu_master_enable_sva(struct arm_smmu_master *master) int arm_smmu_master_disable_sva(struct arm_smmu_master *master) { mutex_lock(&sva_lock); - if (!list_empty(&master->bonds)) { + if (master->nr_attached_sva_domains != 0) { dev_err(master->dev, "cannot disable SVA, device is bound\n"); mutex_unlock(&sva_lock); return -EBUSY; @@ -500,22 +489,14 @@ void arm_smmu_sva_notifier_synchronize(void) void arm_smmu_sva_remove_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device *dev, ioasid_t id) { - struct mm_struct *mm = domain->mm; - struct arm_smmu_bond *bond = NULL, *t; + struct arm_smmu_sva_domain *sva_domain = to_sva_domain(domain); struct arm_smmu_master *master = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev); mutex_lock(&sva_lock); - list_for_each_entry(t, &master->bonds, list) { - if (t->mm == mm) { - bond = t; - break; - } - } - - if (!WARN_ON(!bond)) { - list_del(&bond->list); - arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_put(bond->smmu_mn); - kfree(bond); + if (!WARN_ON(!sva_domain->smmu_mn)) { + master->nr_attached_sva_domains -= 1; + arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_put(sva_domain->smmu_mn); + sva_domain->smmu_mn = NULL; } mutex_unlock(&sva_lock); } @@ -527,7 +508,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_sva_set_dev_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct mm_struct *mm = domain->mm; mutex_lock(&sva_lock); - ret = __arm_smmu_sva_bind(dev, mm); + ret = __arm_smmu_sva_bind(dev, to_sva_domain(domain), mm); mutex_unlock(&sva_lock); return ret; @@ -545,12 +526,11 @@ static const struct iommu_domain_ops arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops = { struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_sva_domain_alloc(void) { - struct iommu_domain *domain; + struct arm_smmu_sva_domain *sva_domain; - domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*domain), GFP_KERNEL); - if (!domain) + sva_domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*sva_domain), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!sva_domain) return NULL; - domain->ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops; - - return domain; + sva_domain->iommu_domain.ops = &arm_smmu_sva_domain_ops; + return &sva_domain->iommu_domain; } diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c index 9b0dc35056019..911bcfd90cd85 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c @@ -2685,7 +2685,6 @@ static struct iommu_device *arm_smmu_probe_device(struct device *dev) master->dev = dev; master->smmu = smmu; - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&master->bonds); dev_iommu_priv_set(dev, master); ret = arm_smmu_insert_master(smmu, master); diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h index dcab85698a4e2..3a518834429b1 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h @@ -702,7 +702,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_master { bool stall_enabled; bool sva_enabled; bool iopf_enabled; - struct list_head bonds; + unsigned int nr_attached_sva_domains; unsigned int ssid_bits; };
Create a new iommu_domain subclass for SVA iommu domains to hold the data previously stored in the dynamically allocated arm_smmu_bond. Add a simple count of attached SVA domains to arm_smmu_master to replace the list of bonds. Signed-off-by: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com> --- .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c | 70 +++++++------------ drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 1 - drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)