From: Nithin Dabilpuram <nithind1988@gmail.com> To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>, dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH 2/2] vfio: fix partial DMA unmapping for VFIO type1 Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:40:40 +0530 Message-ID: <20201016071015.GA22749@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <66b61bda-03a8-d4c4-af9f-0f90a6ef956d@intel.com> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 04:10:31PM +0100, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 15-Oct-20 12:57 PM, Nithin Dabilpuram wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 3:31 PM Burakov, Anatoly > > <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 15-Oct-20 7:09 AM, Nithin Dabilpuram wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 04:07:10PM +0100, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > > > > > External Email > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > On 12-Oct-20 9:11 AM, Nithin Dabilpuram wrote: > > > > > > Partial unmapping is not supported for VFIO IOMMU type1 > > > > > > by kernel. Though kernel gives return as zero, the unmapped size > > > > > > returned will not be same as expected. So check for > > > > > > returned unmap size and return error. > > > > > > > > > > > > For case of DMA map/unmap triggered by heap allocations, > > > > > > maintain granularity of memseg page size so that heap > > > > > > expansion and contraction does not have this issue. > > > > > > > > > > This is quite unfortunate, because there was a different bug that had to do > > > > > with kernel having a very limited number of mappings available [1], as a > > > > > result of which the page concatenation code was added. > > > > > > > > > > It should therefore be documented that the dma_entry_limit parameter should > > > > > be adjusted should the user run out of the DMA entries. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lore.kernel.org_lkml_155414977872.12780.13728555131525362206.stgit-40gimli.home_T_&d=DwICaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=FZ_tPCbgFOh18zwRPO9H0yDx8VW38vuapifdDfc8SFQ&m=3GMg-634_cdUCY4WpQPwjzZ_S4ckuMHOnt2FxyyjXMk&s=TJLzppkaDS95VGyRHX2hzflQfb9XLK0OiOszSXoeXKk&e= > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, " cannot clear DMA remapping, error %i (%s)\n", > > > > > > errno, strerror(errno)); > > > > > > return -1; > > > > > > + } else if (dma_unmap.size != len) { > > > > > > + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, " unexpected size %"PRIu64" of DMA " > > > > > > + "remapping cleared instead of %"PRIu64"\n", > > > > > > + (uint64_t)dma_unmap.size, len); > > > > > > + rte_errno = EIO; > > > > > > + return -1; > > > > > > } > > > > > > } > > > > > > @@ -1853,6 +1869,12 @@ container_dma_unmap(struct vfio_config *vfio_cfg, uint64_t vaddr, uint64_t iova, > > > > > > /* we're partially unmapping a previously mapped region, so we > > > > > > * need to split entry into two. > > > > > > */ > > > > > > + if (!vfio_cfg->vfio_iommu_type->partial_unmap) { > > > > > > + RTE_LOG(DEBUG, EAL, "DMA partial unmap unsupported\n"); > > > > > > + rte_errno = ENOTSUP; > > > > > > + ret = -1; > > > > > > + goto out; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > How would we ever arrive here if we never do more than 1 page worth of > > > > > memory anyway? I don't think this is needed. > > > > > > > > container_dma_unmap() is called by user via rte_vfio_container_dma_unmap() > > > > and when he maps we don't split it as we don't about his memory. > > > > So if he maps multiple pages and tries to unmap partially, then we should fail. > > > > > > Should we map it in page granularity then, instead of adding this > > > discrepancy between EAL and user mapping? I.e. instead of adding a > > > workaround, how about we just do the same thing for user mem mappings? > > > > > In heap mapping's we map and unmap it at huge page granularity as we will always > > maintain that. > > > > But here I think we don't know if user's allocation is huge page or > > collection of system > > pages. Only thing we can do here is map it at system page granularity which > > could waste entries if he say really is working with hugepages. Isn't ? > > > > Yeah we do. The API mandates the pages granularity, and it will check > against page size and number of IOVA entries, so yes, we do enforce the fact > that the IOVA addresses supplied by the user have to be page addresses. If I see rte_vfio_container_dma_map(), there is no mention of Huge page size user is providing or we computing. He can call rte_vfio_container_dma_map() with 1GB huge page or 4K system page. Am I missing something ? > > -- > Thanks, > Anatoly
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-16 7:10 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <20201012081106.10610-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2020-10-12 8:11 ` [dpdk-stable] " Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-14 15:07 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-10-15 6:09 ` [dpdk-stable] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-15 10:00 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-10-15 11:38 ` Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-15 11:50 ` Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-15 11:57 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-15 15:10 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-10-16 7:10 ` Nithin Dabilpuram [this message] 2020-10-17 16:14 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-10-19 9:43 ` Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-22 12:13 ` Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-28 13:04 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-10-28 14:17 ` Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-10-28 16:07 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-10-28 16:31 ` Nithin Dabilpuram [not found] ` <20201105090423.11954-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2020-11-05 9:04 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 1/3] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-11-05 9:04 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 2/3] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 iova as va Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-11-10 14:04 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2020-11-10 14:22 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Burakov, Anatoly 2020-11-10 14:17 ` [dpdk-stable] " Burakov, Anatoly 2020-11-11 5:08 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-11-11 10:00 ` Burakov, Anatoly [not found] ` <20201201193302.28131-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2020-12-01 19:32 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3 1/4] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-12-01 19:33 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3 2/4] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 IOVA as VA Nithin Dabilpuram [not found] ` <20201202054647.3449-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2020-12-02 5:46 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4 1/4] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-12-02 18:36 ` David Christensen 2020-12-02 5:46 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4 2/4] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 IOVA as VA Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-12-02 18:38 ` David Christensen [not found] ` <20201214081935.23577-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2020-12-14 8:19 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 1/4] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-12-14 8:19 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 2/4] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 IOVA as VA Nithin Dabilpuram [not found] ` <20201217190604.29803-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2020-12-17 19:06 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v6 1/4] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2020-12-17 19:06 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v6 2/4] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 IOVA as VA Nithin Dabilpuram [not found] ` <20210112173923.30320-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2021-01-12 17:39 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v7 1/3] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2021-01-12 17:39 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v7 2/3] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 IOVA as VA Nithin Dabilpuram [not found] ` <20210115073243.7025-1-ndabilpuram@marvell.com> 2021-01-15 7:32 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v8 1/3] vfio: revert changes for map contiguous areas in one go Nithin Dabilpuram 2021-03-05 7:50 ` David Marchand 2021-03-05 13:54 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2021-03-05 15:50 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Nithin Dabilpuram 2021-01-15 7:32 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v8 2/3] vfio: fix DMA mapping granularity for type1 IOVA as VA Nithin Dabilpuram 2021-01-15 7:32 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v8 3/3] test: change external memory test to use system page sz Nithin Dabilpuram 2021-02-11 11:21 ` Burakov, Anatoly
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20201016071015.GA22749@gmail.com \ --to=nithind1988@gmail.com \ --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \ --cc=dev@dpdk.org \ --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \ --cc=stable@dpdk.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
patches for DPDK stable branches This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/stable/0 stable/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 stable stable/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/stable \ stable@dpdk.org public-inbox-index stable Example config snippet for mirrors. Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.stable AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git