Hi Nadav,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nadav Amit [mailto:nadav.a...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 2:13 AM
> To: Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)
> <longpe...@huawei.com>
> Cc: David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org>; Lu Baolu
> <baolu...@linux.intel.com>; Joerg Roedel <j...@8bytes.org>; w...@kernel.org;
> alex.william...@redhat.com; chenjiashang <chenjiash...@huawei.com>;
> iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org; Gonglei (Arei) <arei.gong...@huawei.com>;
> LKML <linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: A problem of Intel IOMMU hardware ？
>
>
>
> > On Mar 17, 2021, at 2:35 AM, Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service
> Product Dept.) <longpe...@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Nadav,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Nadav Amit [mailto:nadav.a...@gmail.com]
> >>> reproduce the problem with high probability (~50%).
> >>
> >> I saw Lu replied, and he is much more knowledgable than I am (I was
> >> just intrigued by your email).
> >>
> >> However, if I were you I would try also to remove some
> >> “optimizations” to look for the root-cause (e.g., use domain specific
> invalidations instead of page-specific).
> >>
> >
> > Good suggestion! But we did it these days, we tried to use global
> > invalidations as
> follow:
> > iommu->flush.flush_iotlb(iommu, did, 0, 0,
> > DMA_TLB_DSI_FLUSH);
> > But can not resolve the problem.
> >
> >> The first thing that comes to my mind is the invalidation hint (ih)
> >> in iommu_flush_iotlb_psi(). I would remove it to see whether you get
> >> the failure without it.
> >
> > We also notice the IH, but the IH is always ZERO in our case, as the spec
> > says:
> > '''
> > Paging-structure-cache entries caching second-level mappings
> > associated with the specified domain-id and the
> > second-level-input-address range are invalidated, if the Invalidation
> > Hint
> > (IH) field is Clear.
> > '''
> >
> > It seems the software is everything fine, so we've no choice but to suspect
> > the
> hardware.
>
> Ok, I am pretty much out of ideas. I have two more suggestions, but they are
> much
> less likely to help. Yet, they can further help to rule out software bugs:
>
> 1. dma_clear_pte() seems to be wrong IMHO. It should have used WRITE_ONCE()
> to prevent split-write, which might potentially cause “invalid” (partially
> cleared) PTE to be stored in the TLB. Having said that, the subsequent IOTLB
> flush
> should have prevented the problem.
>
Yes, use WRITE_ONCE is much safer, however I was just testing the following
code,
it didn't resolved my problem.
static inline void dma_clear_pte(struct dma_pte *pte)
{
WRITE_ONCE(pte->val, 0ULL);
}
> 2. Consider ensuring that the problem is not somehow related to queued
> invalidations. Try to use __iommu_flush_iotlb() instead of qi_flush_iotlb().
>
I tried to force to use __iommu_flush_iotlb(), but maybe something wrong,
the system crashed, so I prefer to lower the priority of this operation.
> Regards,
> Nadav
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
