RE: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Link cache tags of same iommu unit together

From: Duan, Zhenzhong
Date: Wed Dec 18 2024 - 00:23:02 EST




>-----Original Message-----
>From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Link cache tags of same iommu unit together
>
>On 12/16/24 11:38, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> Cache tag invalidation requests for a domain are accumulated until a
>> different iommu unit is found when traversing the cache_tags linked list.
>> But cache tags of same iommu unit can be distributed in the linked list,
>> this make batched flush less efficient. E.g., one device backed by iommu0
>> is attached to a domain in between two devices attaching backed by iommu1.
>>
>> Group cache tags together for same iommu unit in cache_tag_assign() to
>> maximize the performance of batched flush.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c
>> index e5b89f728ad3..726052a841e0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c
>> @@ -48,6 +48,8 @@ static int cache_tag_assign(struct dmar_domain *domain,
>u16 did,
>> struct intel_iommu *iommu = info->iommu;
>> struct cache_tag *tag, *temp;
>> unsigned long flags;
>> + struct cache_tag *temp2 = list_entry(&domain->cache_tags,
>> + struct cache_tag, node);
>
>Is this valid for a list head?

Yes, it's not valid for list head but it's intentional, just want to
avoid unnecessary temp2 check. If I don't do that way, patch will be:

--- a/drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/cache.c
@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ static int cache_tag_assign(struct dmar_domain *domain, u16 did,
struct intel_iommu *iommu = info->iommu;
struct cache_tag *tag, *temp;
unsigned long flags;
+ struct cache_tag *temp2 = NULL;

tag = kzalloc(sizeof(*tag), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!tag)
@@ -73,8 +74,18 @@ static int cache_tag_assign(struct dmar_domain *domain, u16 did,
trace_cache_tag_assign(temp);
return 0;
}
+ if (temp->iommu == iommu)
+ temp2 = temp;
}
- list_add_tail(&tag->node, &domain->cache_tags);
+ /*
+ * Link cache tags of same iommu unit together, so consponding
+ * flush ops can be batched for iommu unit.
+ */
+ if (temp2)
+ list_add(&tag->node, &temp2->node);
+ else
+ list_add_tail((&tag->node, &domain->cache_tags);
+
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&domain->cache_lock, flags);
trace_cache_tag_assign(tag);

Thanks
Zhenzhong

>
>>
>> tag = kzalloc(sizeof(*tag), GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (!tag)
>> @@ -73,8 +75,15 @@ static int cache_tag_assign(struct dmar_domain
>*domain, u16 did,
>> trace_cache_tag_assign(temp);
>> return 0;
>> }
>> + if (temp->iommu == iommu)
>> + temp2 = temp;
>> }
>> - list_add_tail(&tag->node, &domain->cache_tags);
>> + /*
>> + * Link cache tags of same iommu unit together, so consponding
>> + * flush ops can be batched for iommu unit.
>> + */
>> + list_add(&tag->node, &temp2->node);
>> +
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&domain->cache_lock, flags);
>> trace_cache_tag_assign(tag);
>>