On 2021-06-22 08:11, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
Hi Robin,
On 2021-06-21 21:15, Robin Murphy wrote:
On 2021-06-18 03:51, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
Add a quirk IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_TLB_INV_ALL to invalidate entire context
with tlb_flush_all() callback in partial walk flush to improve unmap
performance on select few platforms where the cost of over-invalidation
is less than the unmap latency.
I still think this doesn't belong anywhere near io-pgtable at all.
It's a driver-internal decision how exactly it implements a non-leaf
invalidation, and that may be more complex than a predetermined
boolean decision. For example, I've just realised for SMMUv3 we can't
invalidate multiple levels of table at once with a range command,
since if we assume the whole thing is mapped at worst-case page
granularity we may fail to invalidate any parts which are mapped as
intermediate-level blocks. If invalidating a 1GB region (with 4KB
granule) means having to fall back to 256K non-range commands, we may
not want to invalidate by VA then, even though doing so for a 2MB
region is still optimal.
It's also quite feasible that drivers might want to do this for leaf
invalidations too - if you don't like issuing 512 commands to
invalidate 2MB, do you like issuing 511 commands to invalidate 2044KB?
- and at that point the logic really has to be in the driver anyway.
Ok I will move this to tlb_flush_walk() functions in the drivers. In the
previous
v1 thread, you suggested to make the choice in iommu_get_dma_strict() test,
I assume you meant the test in iommu_dma_init_domain() with a flag or
was it
the leaf driver(ex:arm-smmu.c) test of iommu_get_dma_strict() in
init_domain?
Yes, I meant literally inside the same condition where we currently set
"pgtbl_cfg.quirks |= IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT;" in
arm_smmu_init_domain_context().
I am still a bit confused on where this flag would be? Should this be a
part
of struct iommu_domain?
Well, if you were to rewrite the config with an alternative set of
flush_ops at that point it would be implicit. For a flag, probably
either in arm_smmu_domain or arm_smmu_impl. Maybe a flag would be less
useful than generalising straight to a "maximum number of by-VA
invalidations it's worth sending individually" threshold value? It's
clear to me what overall shape and separation of responsibility is most
logical, but beyond that I don't have a particularly strong opinion on
the exact implementation; I've just been chucking ideas around :)
Cheers,
Robin.
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
