Stefano Garzarella
2023-Oct-18 08:05 UTC
[RFC v2 PATCH] vdpa_sim: implement .reset_map support
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:11:33PM -0700, Si-Wei Liu wrote:>RFC only. Not tested on vdpa-sim-blk with user virtual address. >Works fine with vdpa-sim-net which uses physical address to map. > >This patch is based on top of [1]. > >[1] https://lore.kernel.org/virtualization/1696928580-7520-1-git-send-email-si-wei.liu at oracle.com/ > >Signed-off-by: Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu at oracle.com> > >--- >RFC v2: > - initialize iotlb to passthrough mode in device addI tested this version and I didn't see any issue ;-) Tested-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com>>--- > drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >index 76d41058add9..2a0a6042d61d 100644 >--- a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >+++ b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >@@ -151,13 +151,6 @@ static void vdpasim_do_reset(struct vdpasim *vdpasim) > &vdpasim->iommu_lock); > } > >- for (i = 0; i < vdpasim->dev_attr.nas; i++) { >- vhost_iotlb_reset(&vdpasim->iommu[i]); >- vhost_iotlb_add_range(&vdpasim->iommu[i], 0, ULONG_MAX, >- 0, VHOST_MAP_RW); >- vdpasim->iommu_pt[i] = true; >- } >- > vdpasim->running = true; > spin_unlock(&vdpasim->iommu_lock); > >@@ -259,8 +252,12 @@ struct vdpasim *vdpasim_create(struct vdpasim_dev_attr *dev_attr, > if (!vdpasim->iommu_pt) > goto err_iommu; > >- for (i = 0; i < vdpasim->dev_attr.nas; i++) >+ for (i = 0; i < vdpasim->dev_attr.nas; i++) { > vhost_iotlb_init(&vdpasim->iommu[i], max_iotlb_entries, 0); >+ vhost_iotlb_add_range(&vdpasim->iommu[i], 0, ULONG_MAX, 0, >+ VHOST_MAP_RW); >+ vdpasim->iommu_pt[i] = true; >+ } > > for (i = 0; i < dev_attr->nvqs; i++) > vringh_set_iotlb(&vdpasim->vqs[i].vring, &vdpasim->iommu[0], >@@ -637,6 +634,25 @@ static int vdpasim_set_map(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, unsigned int asid, > return ret; > } > >+static int vdpasim_reset_map(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, unsigned int asid) >+{ >+ struct vdpasim *vdpasim = vdpa_to_sim(vdpa); >+ >+ if (asid >= vdpasim->dev_attr.nas) >+ return -EINVAL; >+ >+ spin_lock(&vdpasim->iommu_lock); >+ if (vdpasim->iommu_pt[asid]) >+ goto out; >+ vhost_iotlb_reset(&vdpasim->iommu[asid]); >+ vhost_iotlb_add_range(&vdpasim->iommu[asid], 0, ULONG_MAX, >+ 0, VHOST_MAP_RW); >+ vdpasim->iommu_pt[asid] = true; >+out: >+ spin_unlock(&vdpasim->iommu_lock); >+ return 0; >+} >+ > static int vdpasim_bind_mm(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, struct mm_struct *mm) > { > struct vdpasim *vdpasim = vdpa_to_sim(vdpa); >@@ -759,6 +775,7 @@ static const struct vdpa_config_ops vdpasim_config_ops = { > .set_group_asid = vdpasim_set_group_asid, > .dma_map = vdpasim_dma_map, > .dma_unmap = vdpasim_dma_unmap, >+ .reset_map = vdpasim_reset_map, > .bind_mm = vdpasim_bind_mm, > .unbind_mm = vdpasim_unbind_mm, > .free = vdpasim_free, >@@ -796,6 +813,7 @@ static const struct vdpa_config_ops vdpasim_batch_config_ops = { > .get_iova_range = vdpasim_get_iova_range, > .set_group_asid = vdpasim_set_group_asid, > .set_map = vdpasim_set_map, >+ .reset_map = vdpasim_reset_map, > .bind_mm = vdpasim_bind_mm, > .unbind_mm = vdpasim_unbind_mm, > .free = vdpasim_free, >-- >2.39.3 >
On 10/18/2023 1:05 AM, Stefano Garzarella wrote:> On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:11:33PM -0700, Si-Wei Liu wrote: >> RFC only. Not tested on vdpa-sim-blk with user virtual address. >> Works fine with vdpa-sim-net which uses physical address to map. >> >> This patch is based on top of [1]. >> >> [1] >> https://lore.kernel.org/virtualization/1696928580-7520-1-git-send-email-si-wei.liu at oracle.com/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu at oracle.com> >> >> --- >> RFC v2: >> ?- initialize iotlb to passthrough mode in device add > > I tested this version and I didn't see any issue ;-)Great, thank you so much for your help on testing my patch, Stefano! Just for my own interest/curiosity, currently there's no vhost-vdpa backend client implemented for vdpa-sim-blk or any vdpa block device in userspace as yet, correct? So there was no test specific to vhost-vdpa that needs to be exercised, right? Thanks, -Siwei> > Tested-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> > >> --- >> drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- >> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >> b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >> index 76d41058add9..2a0a6042d61d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c >> @@ -151,13 +151,6 @@ static void vdpasim_do_reset(struct vdpasim >> *vdpasim) >> ???????????????? &vdpasim->iommu_lock); >> ????} >> >> -??? for (i = 0; i < vdpasim->dev_attr.nas; i++) { >> -??????? vhost_iotlb_reset(&vdpasim->iommu[i]); >> -??????? vhost_iotlb_add_range(&vdpasim->iommu[i], 0, ULONG_MAX, >> -????????????????????? 0, VHOST_MAP_RW); >> -??????? vdpasim->iommu_pt[i] = true; >> -??? } >> - >> ????vdpasim->running = true; >> ????spin_unlock(&vdpasim->iommu_lock); >> >> @@ -259,8 +252,12 @@ struct vdpasim *vdpasim_create(struct >> vdpasim_dev_attr *dev_attr, >> ????if (!vdpasim->iommu_pt) >> ??????? goto err_iommu; >> >> -??? for (i = 0; i < vdpasim->dev_attr.nas; i++) >> +??? for (i = 0; i < vdpasim->dev_attr.nas; i++) { >> ??????? vhost_iotlb_init(&vdpasim->iommu[i], max_iotlb_entries, 0); >> +??????? vhost_iotlb_add_range(&vdpasim->iommu[i], 0, ULONG_MAX, 0, >> +????????????????????? VHOST_MAP_RW); >> +??????? vdpasim->iommu_pt[i] = true; >> +??? } >> >> ????for (i = 0; i < dev_attr->nvqs; i++) >> ??????? vringh_set_iotlb(&vdpasim->vqs[i].vring, &vdpasim->iommu[0], >> @@ -637,6 +634,25 @@ static int vdpasim_set_map(struct vdpa_device >> *vdpa, unsigned int asid, >> ????return ret; >> } >> >> +static int vdpasim_reset_map(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, unsigned int >> asid) >> +{ >> +??? struct vdpasim *vdpasim = vdpa_to_sim(vdpa); >> + >> +??? if (asid >= vdpasim->dev_attr.nas) >> +??????? return -EINVAL; >> + >> +??? spin_lock(&vdpasim->iommu_lock); >> +??? if (vdpasim->iommu_pt[asid]) >> +??????? goto out; >> +??? vhost_iotlb_reset(&vdpasim->iommu[asid]); >> +??? vhost_iotlb_add_range(&vdpasim->iommu[asid], 0, ULONG_MAX, >> +????????????????? 0, VHOST_MAP_RW); >> +??? vdpasim->iommu_pt[asid] = true; >> +out: >> +??? spin_unlock(&vdpasim->iommu_lock); >> +??? return 0; >> +} >> + >> static int vdpasim_bind_mm(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, struct mm_struct >> *mm) >> { >> ????struct vdpasim *vdpasim = vdpa_to_sim(vdpa); >> @@ -759,6 +775,7 @@ static const struct vdpa_config_ops >> vdpasim_config_ops = { >> ????.set_group_asid???????? = vdpasim_set_group_asid, >> ????.dma_map??????????????? = vdpasim_dma_map, >> ????.dma_unmap????????????? = vdpasim_dma_unmap, >> +??? .reset_map????????????? = vdpasim_reset_map, >> ????.bind_mm??????? = vdpasim_bind_mm, >> ????.unbind_mm??????? = vdpasim_unbind_mm, >> ????.free?????????????????? = vdpasim_free, >> @@ -796,6 +813,7 @@ static const struct vdpa_config_ops >> vdpasim_batch_config_ops = { >> ????.get_iova_range???????? = vdpasim_get_iova_range, >> ????.set_group_asid???????? = vdpasim_set_group_asid, >> ????.set_map??????????????? = vdpasim_set_map, >> +??? .reset_map????????????? = vdpasim_reset_map, >> ????.bind_mm??????? = vdpasim_bind_mm, >> ????.unbind_mm??????? = vdpasim_unbind_mm, >> ????.free?????????????????? = vdpasim_free, >> -- >> 2.39.3 >> >