Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] iommu/mediatek: Add mt8173 IOMMU driver

[Yong Wu]

On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 16:33 +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 03/08/15 11:21, Yong Wu wrote:
> > This patch adds support for mediatek m4u (MultiMedia Memory Management
> > Unit).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> [...]
> > +/*
> > + * There is only one iommu domain called the m4u domain that
> > + * all Multimedia modules share.
> > + */
> > +static struct mtk_iommu_domain *m4udom;
> 
> It's a shame this can't be part of the m4u device's mtk_iommu_data, but 
> since the way iommu_domain_alloc works makes that impossible, I think we 
> have little choice but to use the global and hope your guys never build 
> a system with two of these things in ;)

Hi Robin,
   Thanks very much for your review. This gobal variable trouble me very
much. please also help check below.

> 
> [...]
> > +static struct iommu_domain *mtk_iommu_domain_alloc(unsigned type)
> > +{
> > +       struct mtk_iommu_domain *priv;
> > +
> > +       if (type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_UNMANAGED && type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA)
> > +               return NULL;
> > +
> > +       if (m4udom)/* The m4u domain exist. */
> > +               return &m4udom->domain;

     From Joerg's comment[0]: "This is not going to work. If you always
return the same domain the iommu core might re-initialize domain state
(and overwrite changed state)."

     It seems that I have to delete this here. then alloc iommu-domain
every time. and add some workaround code in mtk_iommu_attach_device like
our v3[1](reserve one as the m4u domain and delete the others).
Then the code maybe not very concise, but it could also work in the
future, Is it OK?

[0]:http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/iommu/2015-August/014057.html
[1]:http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/iommu/2015-July/013631.html

> > +
> > +       priv = kzalloc(sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +       if (!priv)
> > +               return NULL;
> > +
> > +       priv->domain.geometry.aperture_start = 0;
> > +       priv->domain.geometry.aperture_end = DMA_BIT_MASK(32);
> > +       priv->domain.geometry.force_aperture = true;
> 
> My intention is that in the IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA case you'd call 
> iommu_get_dma_cookie(&priv->domain) here as well, that way I can get rid 
> of some of the dodgy workarounds in arch_setup_dma_ops which try to 
> cover all possible cases (and which I'm now not 100% confident in). I'm 
> just about to start trying to fix that up (expect a repost of my series 
> in a week or two once -rc1 has landed).

  I will add like this:
  if (type == IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA && iommu_get_dma_cookie(&priv->domain)) {
       kfree(priv);
       return NULL;
  }

> 
> > +
> > +       m4udom = priv;
> > +
> > +       return &priv->domain;
> > +}
> [...]
> > +static int mtk_iommu_add_device(struct device *dev)
> > +{
> > +       struct iommu_group *group;
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       if (!dev->archdata.iommu) /* Not a iommu client device */
> > +               return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +       group = iommu_group_get(dev);
> > +       if (!group) {
> > +               group = iommu_group_alloc();
> > +               if (IS_ERR(group)) {
> > +                       dev_err(dev, "Failed to allocate IOMMU group\n");
> > +                       return PTR_ERR(group);
> > +               }
> > +       }
> > +
>  > +       ret = iommu_group_add_device(group, dev);
> > +       if (ret) {
> > +               dev_err(dev, "Failed to add IOMMU group\n");
> > +               goto err_group_put;
> > +       }
> 
> I know the rest of the code means that you can't hit it in practice, but 
> if you ever did have two client devices in the same group then the 
> iommu_group_get() could legitimately succeed for the second device, then 
> you'd blow up creating a duplicate sysfs entry by adding the device to 
> its own group again. Probably not what you want.

   the "dev" is different while enter this function, That is to say
every client device have its own iommu-group. is it right?

> 
> > +
> > +       ret = iommu_attach_group(&m4udom->domain, group);
> > +       if (ret)
> > +               dev_err(dev, "Failed to attach IOMMU group\n");
> 
> Similarly here, if two devices did share a group then the group could 
> legitimately already be attached to a domain here (by the first device), 
> so attaching it again would be wrong. I think it would be nicer to check 
> with iommu_get_domain_for_dev() first to see if you need to do anything 
> at all (a valid domain from that implies a valid group).

   Here all the devices has their own iommu-group, I only attach the
same iommu-domain for them due to our m4u HW. All the clients are in
M4U-HW's domain and there is only one pagetable here.

> 
> > +
> > +err_group_put:
> > +       iommu_group_put(group);
> > +       return ret;
> > +}
> [...]
> > +static int mtk_iommu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +       struct mtk_iommu_data   *data;
> > +       struct device           *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +       void __iomem            *protect;
> > +       int                     ret;
> > +
> > +       data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +       if (!data)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +       /* Protect memory. HW will access here while translation fault.*/
> > +       protect = devm_kzalloc(dev, MTK_PROTECT_PA_ALIGN * 2, GFP_KERNEL);
> > +       if (!protect)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> > +       data->protect_base = virt_to_phys(protect);
> > +
> > +       ret = mtk_iommu_parse_dt(pdev, data);
> > +       if (ret)
> > +               return ret;
> > +
> > +       if (!m4udom)/* There is no iommu client */
> > +               return 0;
> 
> I don't quite follow this: m4udom is apparently only created by someone 
> calling domain_alloc() - how can you guarantee that happens before this 
> driver is probed? - but if they then go and try to attach the device to 
> their new domain, it's going to end up in mtk_hw_init() poking the 
> hardware of the m4u device that can't have even probed yet.

    I think the probe will run always earlier than mtk_hw_init.
    In the mtk_iommu_attach_device below, I add iommu_group_get to
guarantee the sequence.
//==================
static int mtk_iommu_attach_device(struct iommu_domain *domain,
				   struct device *dev)
{
	struct mtk_iommu_domain *priv = to_mtk_domain(domain);
	struct iommu_group *group;
	int ret;

	group = iommu_group_get(dev);
	if (!group)
		return 0;
	iommu_group_put(group);

	ret = mtk_iommu_init_domain_context(priv);
	if (ret)
		return ret;

	return mtk_iommu_config(priv, dev, true);
}
//======================
   After the probe done, It will enter bus_set_iommu->
mtk_iommu_add_device where will create iommu group for it.
then enter iommu_attach_group->mtk_iommu_attach_device again.
is this ok here?

About "how can you guarantee that happens before this 
driver is probed?"
->Sorry, I can't guarantee this. The domain_alloc is called by
arch_setup_dma_ops in the DMA core, I will change this depend on the
next DMA.

> 
> I can only imagine it currently works by sheer chance due to the 
> horrible arch_setup_dma_ops delayed attachment workaround, so even if I 
> can't remove that completely when I look at it next week I'm liable to 
> change it in a way that breaks this badly ;)
> 
> Robin.
> 
> > +
> > +       data->dev = dev;
> > +       m4udom->data = data;
> > +       dev_set_drvdata(dev, m4udom);
> > +
> > +       return 0;
> > +}
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/