Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] vring: Introduce vring_use_dma_api()

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:23 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:22:03AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> > This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
>> > We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by vring_use_dma_api().
>> > Eventually we may be able to return true on more and more systems,
>> > and hopefully we can get rid of vring_use_dma_api() entirely some
>> > day.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> > index e12e385f7ac3..4b8dab4960bb 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> > @@ -25,6 +25,30 @@
>> >  #include
>> >  #include
>> >
>> > +/*
>> > + * The interaction between virtio and a possible IOMMU is a mess.
>> > + *
>> > + * On most systems with virtio, physical addresses match bus addresses,
>> > + * and it doesn't particularly matter whether we use the DMI API.
>> > + *
>> > + * On some sytems, including Xen and any system with a physical device
>> > + * that speaks virtio behind a physical IOMMU, we must use the DMA API
>> > + * for virtio DMA to work at all.
>> > + *
>> > + * On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci devices are
>> > + * enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio host
>> > + * ignores the IOMMU, so we must either pretend that the IOMMU isn't
>> > + * there or somehow map everything as the identity.
>> > + *
>> > + * For the time being, we preseve historic behavior and bypass the DMA
>> > + * API.
>> > + */
>>
>> I spot at least three typos in there, FWIW. ('DMI API', 'sytems',
>> 'preseve').
>
> Good catch, hopefully will be fixed in v2.

Queued for v2.

>
>> > +static bool vring_use_dma_api(void)
>> > +{
>> > +   return false;
>> > +}
>> > +
>>
>> I'd quite like to see this be an explicit opt-out for the known-broken
>> platforms. We've listed the SPARC and PPC64 issues. For x86 I need to
>> refresh my memory as a prelude to trying to fix it... was the issue
>> *just* that Qemu tends to ship with a broken BIOS that misdescribes the
>> virtio devices (and any assigned PCI devices) as being behind an IOMMU
>> when they're not, in the rare case that Qemu actually exposes its
>> partially-implemented virtual IOMMU to the guest?
>>
>> Could we have an arch_vring_eschew_dma_api(dev) function which the
>> affected architectures could provide (as a prelude to fixing it so that
>> the DMA API does the right thing for *itself*)?
>
> I'm fine with this.

I modified vring_use_dma_api to take a vring_virtqueue* parameter to
make this easier.

I'm a bit torn here.  I want to get the mechanism and the Xen part in,
and there's unlikely to be much debate on those as a matter of
principle.  I'd also like to flip as many arches over as possible, but
that could be trickier.  Let me mull over this.

--Andy