On 2020/3/21 0:20, Jacob Pan wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:45:26 +0800
Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
On 2020/3/20 12:32, Jacob Pan wrote:
IOTLB flush already included in the PASID tear down process. There
is no need to flush again.
It seems that intel_pasid_tear_down_entry() doesn't flush the pasid
based device TLB?
I saw this code in intel_pasid_tear_down_entry(). Isn't the last line
flush the devtlb? Not in guest of course since the passdown tlb flush
is inclusive.
pasid_cache_invalidation_with_pasid(iommu, did, pasid);
iotlb_invalidation_with_pasid(iommu, did, pasid);
/* Device IOTLB doesn't need to be flushed in caching mode. */
if (!cap_caching_mode(iommu->cap))
devtlb_invalidation_with_pasid(iommu, dev, pasid);
But devtlb_invalidation_with_pasid() doesn't do the right thing, it
flushes the device tlb, instead of pasid-based device tlb.
static void
devtlb_invalidation_with_pasid(struct intel_iommu *iommu,
struct device *dev, int pasid)
{
struct device_domain_info *info;
u16 sid, qdep, pfsid;
info = dev->archdata.iommu;
if (!info || !info->ats_enabled)
return;
sid = info->bus << 8 | info->devfn;
qdep = info->ats_qdep;
pfsid = info->pfsid;
qi_flush_dev_iotlb(iommu, sid, pfsid, qdep, 0, 64 -
VTD_PAGE_SHIFT);
}
Best regards,
baolu
Best regards,
baolu
Cc: Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun....@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c | 6 ++----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c b/drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c
index 8f42d717d8d7..1483f1845762 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c
@@ -268,10 +268,9 @@ static void intel_mm_release(struct
mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
* *has* to handle gracefully without affecting other
processes. */
rcu_read_lock();
- list_for_each_entry_rcu(sdev, &svm->devs, list) {
+ list_for_each_entry_rcu(sdev, &svm->devs, list)
intel_pasid_tear_down_entry(svm->iommu,
sdev->dev, svm->pasid);
- intel_flush_svm_range_dev(svm, sdev, 0, -1, 0);
- }
+
rcu_read_unlock();
}
@@ -731,7 +730,6 @@ int intel_svm_unbind_mm(struct device *dev, int
pasid)
* large and has to be physically
contiguous. So it's
* hard to be as defensive as we might
like. */ intel_pasid_tear_down_entry(iommu, dev, svm->pasid);
- intel_flush_svm_range_dev(svm, sdev, 0,
-1, 0); kfree_rcu(sdev, rcu);
if (list_empty(&svm->devs)) {
[Jacob Pan]
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
