Virtualization - Feb 2016 - [PATCH v5 04/10] vring: Introduce vring_use_dma_api()

On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski
wrote:
> This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
> We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by vring_use_dma_api().
> Eventually we may be able to return true on more and more systems,
> and hopefully we can get rid of vring_use_dma_api() entirely some
> day.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto at kernel.org>
> ---
> ?drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ?1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> index e12e385f7ac3..4b8dab4960bb 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,30 @@
> ?#include 
> ?#include 
> ?
> +/*
> + * The interaction between virtio and a possible IOMMU is a mess.
> + *
> + * On most systems with virtio, physical addresses match bus addresses,
> + * and it doesn't particularly matter whether we use the DMI API.
> + *
> + * On some sytems, including Xen and any system with a physical device
> + * that speaks virtio behind a physical IOMMU, we must use the DMA API
> + * for virtio DMA to work at all.
> + *
> + * On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci devices are
> + * enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio host
> + * ignores the IOMMU, so we must either pretend that the IOMMU isn't
> + * there or somehow map everything as the identity.
> + *
> + * For the time being, we preseve historic behavior and bypass the DMA
> + * API.
> + */
I spot at least three typos in there, FWIW. ('DMI API',
'sytems',
'preseve').
> +static bool vring_use_dma_api(void)
> +{
> +	return false;
> +}
> +
I'd quite like to see this be an explicit opt-out for the known-broken
platforms. We've listed the SPARC and PPC64 issues. For x86 I need to
refresh my memory as a prelude to trying to fix it... was the issue
*just* that Qemu tends to ship with a broken BIOS that misdescribes the
virtio devices (and any assigned PCI devices) as being behind an IOMMU
when they're not, in the rare case that Qemu actually exposes its
partially-implemented virtual IOMMU to the guest?

Could we have an arch_vring_eschew_dma_api(dev) function which the
affected architectures could provide (as a prelude to fixing it so that
the DMA API does the right thing for *itself*)?

It would be functionally equivalent, but it would help to push the
workarounds to the right place ? rather than entrenching them for ever
in tricky "OMG we need to audit what all the architectures do... let's
not touch it!" code.

-- 
David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse at intel.com                              Intel Corporation

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5691 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/attachments/20160201/d9f5fd15/attachment-0001.bin>

On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:22:03AM +0000, David Woodhouse
wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
> > We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by vring_use_dma_api().
> > Eventually we may be able to return true on more and more systems,
> > and hopefully we can get rid of vring_use_dma_api() entirely some
> > day.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto at kernel.org>
> > ---
> > ?drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > ?1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > index e12e385f7ac3..4b8dab4960bb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > @@ -25,6 +25,30 @@
> > ?#include 
> > ?#include 
> > ?
> > +/*
> > + * The interaction between virtio and a possible IOMMU is a mess.
> > + *
> > + * On most systems with virtio, physical addresses match bus
addresses,
> > + * and it doesn't particularly matter whether we use the DMI API.
> > + *
> > + * On some sytems, including Xen and any system with a physical
device
> > + * that speaks virtio behind a physical IOMMU, we must use the DMA
API
> > + * for virtio DMA to work at all.
> > + *
> > + * On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci devices
are
> > + * enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio host
> > + * ignores the IOMMU, so we must either pretend that the IOMMU
isn't
> > + * there or somehow map everything as the identity.
> > + *
> > + * For the time being, we preseve historic behavior and bypass the
DMA
> > + * API.
> > + */
> 
> I spot at least three typos in there, FWIW. ('DMI API',
'sytems',
> 'preseve').
Good catch, hopefully will be fixed in v2.
> > +static bool vring_use_dma_api(void)
> > +{
> > +	return false;
> > +}
> > +
> 
> I'd quite like to see this be an explicit opt-out for the known-broken
> platforms. We've listed the SPARC and PPC64 issues. For x86 I need to
> refresh my memory as a prelude to trying to fix it... was the issue
> *just* that Qemu tends to ship with a broken BIOS that misdescribes the
> virtio devices (and any assigned PCI devices) as being behind an IOMMU
> when they're not, in the rare case that Qemu actually exposes its
> partially-implemented virtual IOMMU to the guest?
> 
> Could we have an arch_vring_eschew_dma_api(dev) function which the
> affected architectures could provide (as a prelude to fixing it so that
> the DMA API does the right thing for *itself*)?
I'm fine with this.
> It would be functionally equivalent, but it would help to push the
> workarounds to the right place ? rather than entrenching them for ever
> in tricky "OMG we need to audit what all the architectures do...
let's
> not touch it!" code.
> 
> -- 
> David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
> David.Woodhouse at intel.com                              Intel Corporation
>

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:23 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:22:03AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> > This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
>> > We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by
vring_use_dma_api().
>> > Eventually we may be able to return true on more and more systems,
>> > and hopefully we can get rid of vring_use_dma_api() entirely some
>> > day.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto at kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> > index e12e385f7ac3..4b8dab4960bb 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> > @@ -25,6 +25,30 @@
>> >  #include
>> >  #include
>> >
>> > +/*
>> > + * The interaction between virtio and a possible IOMMU is a mess.
>> > + *
>> > + * On most systems with virtio, physical addresses match bus
addresses,
>> > + * and it doesn't particularly matter whether we use the DMI
API.
>> > + *
>> > + * On some sytems, including Xen and any system with a physical
device
>> > + * that speaks virtio behind a physical IOMMU, we must use the
DMA API
>> > + * for virtio DMA to work at all.
>> > + *
>> > + * On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci
devices are
>> > + * enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio
host
>> > + * ignores the IOMMU, so we must either pretend that the IOMMU
isn't
>> > + * there or somehow map everything as the identity.
>> > + *
>> > + * For the time being, we preseve historic behavior and bypass
the DMA
>> > + * API.
>> > + */
>>
>> I spot at least three typos in there, FWIW. ('DMI API',
'sytems',
>> 'preseve').
>
> Good catch, hopefully will be fixed in v2.
Queued for v2.
>
>> > +static bool vring_use_dma_api(void)
>> > +{
>> > +   return false;
>> > +}
>> > +
>>
>> I'd quite like to see this be an explicit opt-out for the
known-broken
>> platforms. We've listed the SPARC and PPC64 issues. For x86 I need
to
>> refresh my memory as a prelude to trying to fix it... was the issue
>> *just* that Qemu tends to ship with a broken BIOS that misdescribes the
>> virtio devices (and any assigned PCI devices) as being behind an IOMMU
>> when they're not, in the rare case that Qemu actually exposes its
>> partially-implemented virtual IOMMU to the guest?
>>
>> Could we have an arch_vring_eschew_dma_api(dev) function which the
>> affected architectures could provide (as a prelude to fixing it so that
>> the DMA API does the right thing for *itself*)?
>
> I'm fine with this.
I modified vring_use_dma_api to take a vring_virtqueue* parameter to
make this easier.

I'm a bit torn here.  I want to get the mechanism and the Xen part in,
and there's unlikely to be much debate on those as a matter of
principle.  I'd also like to flip as many arches over as possible, but
that could be trickier.  Let me mull over this.

--Andy