lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] iommu: arm-smmu: stall support
Hi Rob,

thanks for the RFC patch. I have some comments about the interface to
the IOMMU-API below.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 03:44:33PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote:
> +/**
> + * iommu_domain_resume - Resume translations for a domain after a fault.
> + *
> + * This can be called at some point after the fault handler is called,
> + * allowing the user of the IOMMU to (for example) handle the fault
> + * from a task context. It is illegal to call this if
> + * iommu_domain_set_attr(STALL) failed.
> + *
> + * @domain: the domain to resume
> + * @terminate: if true, the translation that triggered the fault should
> + * be terminated, else it should be retried.
> + */
> +void iommu_domain_resume(struct iommu_domain *domain, bool terminate)
> +{
> + /* invalid to call if iommu_domain_set_attr(STALL) failed: */
> + if (WARN_ON(!domain->ops->domain_resume))
> + return;
> + domain->ops->domain_resume(domain, terminate);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_domain_resume);

So this function is being called by the device driver owning the domain,
right?

I don't think that the resume call-back you added needs to be exposed
like this. It is better to do the page-fault handling completly in the
iommu-code, including calling the resume call-back and just let the
device-driver provide a per-domain call-back to let it handle the fault
and map in the required pages.

The interface could look like this:

* New function iommu_domain_enable_stalls(domain) - When
this function returns the domain is in stall-handling mode. A
iommu_domain_disable_stalls() might make sense too, not sure
about that.

* When stalls are enabled for a domain, report_iommu_fault()
queues the fault to a workqueue (so that its handler can
block) and in the workqueue you call ->resume() based on the
return value of the handler.

As a side-note, as there has been discussion on this: For now it doesn't
make sense to merge this with the SVM page-fault handling efforts, as
this path is different enough (SVM will call handle_mm_fault() as the
handler, for example).


Regards,

Joerg

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-19 14:30    [W:0.111 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site