[PATCH v4 13/15] iommu/dma: Force bouncing if the size is not cacheline-aligned
Catalin Marinas
catalin.marinas at arm.com
Mon May 22 00:27:45 PDT 2023
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 06:09:45PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 19/05/2023 3:02 pm, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 01:29:38PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > > On 2023-05-18 18:34, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
> > > > index 7a9f0b0bddbd..ab1c1681c06e 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
[...]
> > > > @@ -1210,7 +1211,21 @@ static int iommu_dma_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
> > > > goto out;
> > > > }
> > > > - if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev))
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * If kmalloc() buffers are not DMA-safe for this device and
> > > > + * direction, check the individual lengths in the sg list. If one of
> > > > + * the buffers is deemed unsafe, follow the iommu_dma_map_sg_swiotlb()
> > > > + * path for potential bouncing.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (!dma_kmalloc_safe(dev, dir)) {
> > > > + for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i)
> > > > + if (!dma_kmalloc_size_aligned(s->length)) {
> > >
> > > Just to remind myself, we're not checking s->offset on the grounds that if
> > > anyone wants to DMA into an unaligned part of a larger allocation that
> > > remains at their own risk, is that right?
> >
> > Right. That's the case currently as well and those users that were
> > relying on ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN for this have either been migrated to
> > ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN in this series or the logic rewritten (as in the
> > crypto code).
>
> OK, I did manage to summon a vague memory of this being discussed before,
> which at least stopped me asking "Should we be checking..." - perhaps a
> comment on dma_kmalloc_safe() to help remember that reasoning might not go
> amiss?
I'll add some notes in the comment.
> > > Do we care about the (probably theoretical) case where someone might build a
> > > scatterlist for multiple small allocations such that ones which happen to be
> > > adjacent might get combined into a single segment of apparently "safe"
> > > length but still at "unsafe" alignment?
> >
> > I'd say that's theoretical only. One could write such code but normally
> > you'd go for an array rather than relying on the randomness of the
> > kmalloc pointers to figure out adjacent objects. It also only works if
> > the individual struct size is exactly one of the kmalloc cache sizes, so
> > not generic enough.
>
> FWIW I was imagining something like sg_alloc_table_from_pages() but at a
> smaller scale, queueing up some list/array of, say, 32-byte buffers into a
> scatterlist to submit as a single DMA job. I'm not aware that such a thing
> exists though, and I'm inclined to agree that it probably is sufficiently
> unrealistic to be concerned about. As usual I just want to feel comfortable
> that we've explored all the possibilities :)
The strict approach would be to check each pointer and size (not just
small ones) and, if unaligned, test whether it comes from a slab
allocation and what its actual alignment is, something similar to
ksize(). But this adds too many checks for (I think) a theoretical
issue. We discussed this in previous iterations of this series and
concluded to only check the size and bounce accordingly (even if we may
bounce fully aligned slabs or miss cases like the one you mentioned).
Anyway, we have a backup plan if we trip over something like this, just
slightly more expensive.
> > > > + sg_dma_mark_bounced(sg);
> > >
> > > I'd prefer to have iommu_dma_map_sg_swiotlb() mark the segments, since
> > > that's in charge of the actual bouncing. Then we can fold the alignment
> > > check into dev_use_swiotlb() (with the dev_is_untrusted() condition taking
> > > priority), and sync/unmap can simply rely on sg_is_dma_bounced() alone.
> >
> > With this patch we only set the SG_DMA_BOUNCED on the first element of
> > the sglist. Do you want to set this flag only on individual elements
> > being bounced? It makes some sense in principle but the
> > iommu_dma_unmap_sg() path would need to scan the list again to decide
> > whether to go the swiotlb path.
> >
> > If we keep the SG_DMA_BOUNCED flag only on the first element, I can
> > change it to your suggestion, assuming I understood it.
>
> Indeed that should be fine - sync_sg/unmap_sg always have to be given the
> same arguments which were passed to map_sg (and note that in the normal
> case, the DMA address/length will often end up concatenated entirely into
> the first element), so while we still have the two distinct flows
> internally, I don't think there's any issue with only tagging the head of
> the list to steer between them. Of course if it then works out to be trivial
> enough to tag *all* the segments for good measure, there should be no harm
> in that either - at the moment the flag is destined to have more of a "this
> might be bounced, so needs checking" meaning than "this definitely is
> bounced" either way.
I renamed SG_DMA_BOUNCED to SG_DMA_USE_SWIOTLB (to match
dev_use_swiotlb()). The past participle of bounce does make you think
that it was definitely bounced.
Before I post a v5, does this resemble what you suggested:
------8<------------------------------
>From 6558c2bc242ea8598d16b842c8cc77105ce1d5fa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 11:19:31 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] iommu/dma: Force bouncing if the size is not
cacheline-aligned
Similarly to the direct DMA, bounce small allocations as they may have
originated from a kmalloc() cache not safe for DMA. Unlike the direct
DMA, iommu_dma_map_sg() cannot call iommu_dma_map_sg_swiotlb() for all
non-coherent devices as this would break some cases where the iova is
expected to be contiguous (dmabuf). Instead, scan the scatterlist for
any small sizes and only go the swiotlb path if any element of the list
needs bouncing (note that iommu_dma_map_page() would still only bounce
those buffers which are not DMA-aligned).
To avoid scanning the scatterlist on the 'sync' operations, introduce a
SG_DMA_USE_SWIOTLB flag set during the iommu_dma_map_sg_swiotlb() call
(suggested by Robin Murphy).
Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro at 8bytes.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy at arm.com>
---
drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
include/linux/scatterlist.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
index 7a9f0b0bddbd..24a8b8c2368c 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
@@ -520,9 +520,38 @@ static bool dev_is_untrusted(struct device *dev)
return dev_is_pci(dev) && to_pci_dev(dev)->untrusted;
}
-static bool dev_use_swiotlb(struct device *dev)
+static bool dev_use_swiotlb(struct device *dev, size_t size,
+ enum dma_data_direction dir)
{
- return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SWIOTLB) && dev_is_untrusted(dev);
+ return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SWIOTLB) &&
+ (dev_is_untrusted(dev) ||
+ dma_kmalloc_needs_bounce(dev, size, dir));
+}
+
+static bool dev_use_sg_swiotlb(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
+ int nents, enum dma_data_direction dir)
+{
+ struct scatterlist *s;
+ int i;
+
+ if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SWIOTLB))
+ return false;
+
+ if (dev_is_untrusted(dev))
+ return true;
+
+ /*
+ * If kmalloc() buffers are not DMA-safe for this device and
+ * direction, check the individual lengths in the sg list. If any
+ * element is deemed unsafe, use the swiotlb for bouncing.
+ */
+ if (!dma_kmalloc_safe(dev, dir)) {
+ for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i)
+ if (!dma_kmalloc_size_aligned(s->length))
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
}
/**
@@ -922,7 +951,7 @@ static void iommu_dma_sync_single_for_cpu(struct device *dev,
{
phys_addr_t phys;
- if (dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) && !dev_use_swiotlb(dev))
+ if (dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) && !dev_use_swiotlb(dev, size, dir))
return;
phys = iommu_iova_to_phys(iommu_get_dma_domain(dev), dma_handle);
@@ -938,7 +967,7 @@ static void iommu_dma_sync_single_for_device(struct device *dev,
{
phys_addr_t phys;
- if (dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) && !dev_use_swiotlb(dev))
+ if (dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) && !dev_use_swiotlb(dev, size, dir))
return;
phys = iommu_iova_to_phys(iommu_get_dma_domain(dev), dma_handle);
@@ -956,7 +985,7 @@ static void iommu_dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(struct device *dev,
struct scatterlist *sg;
int i;
- if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev))
+ if (sg_is_dma_use_swiotlb(sgl))
for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nelems, i)
iommu_dma_sync_single_for_cpu(dev, sg_dma_address(sg),
sg->length, dir);
@@ -972,7 +1001,7 @@ static void iommu_dma_sync_sg_for_device(struct device *dev,
struct scatterlist *sg;
int i;
- if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev))
+ if (sg_is_dma_use_swiotlb(sgl))
for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nelems, i)
iommu_dma_sync_single_for_device(dev,
sg_dma_address(sg),
@@ -998,7 +1027,8 @@ static dma_addr_t iommu_dma_map_page(struct device *dev, struct page *page,
* If both the physical buffer start address and size are
* page aligned, we don't need to use a bounce page.
*/
- if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev) && iova_offset(iovad, phys | size)) {
+ if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev, size, dir) &&
+ iova_offset(iovad, phys | size)) {
void *padding_start;
size_t padding_size, aligned_size;
@@ -1166,6 +1196,8 @@ static int iommu_dma_map_sg_swiotlb(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
struct scatterlist *s;
int i;
+ sg_dma_mark_use_swiotlb(sg);
+
for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
sg_dma_address(s) = iommu_dma_map_page(dev, sg_page(s),
s->offset, s->length, dir, attrs);
@@ -1210,7 +1242,7 @@ static int iommu_dma_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
goto out;
}
- if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev))
+ if (dev_use_sg_swiotlb(dev, sg, nents, dir))
return iommu_dma_map_sg_swiotlb(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
if (!(attrs & DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC))
@@ -1315,7 +1347,7 @@ static void iommu_dma_unmap_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
struct scatterlist *tmp;
int i;
- if (dev_use_swiotlb(dev)) {
+ if (sg_is_dma_use_swiotlb(sg)) {
iommu_dma_unmap_sg_swiotlb(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
return;
}
diff --git a/include/linux/scatterlist.h b/include/linux/scatterlist.h
index 87aaf8b5cdb4..e0f9fea456c1 100644
--- a/include/linux/scatterlist.h
+++ b/include/linux/scatterlist.h
@@ -248,6 +248,29 @@ static inline void sg_unmark_end(struct scatterlist *sg)
sg->page_link &= ~SG_END;
}
+#define SG_DMA_BUS_ADDRESS (1 << 0)
+#define SG_DMA_USE_SWIOTLB (1 << 1)
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_BOUNCE_UNALIGNED_KMALLOC
+static inline bool sg_is_dma_use_swiotlb(struct scatterlist *sg)
+{
+ return sg->dma_flags & SG_DMA_USE_SWIOTLB;
+}
+
+static inline void sg_dma_mark_use_swiotlb(struct scatterlist *sg)
+{
+ sg->dma_flags |= SG_DMA_USE_SWIOTLB;
+}
+#else
+static inline bool sg_is_dma_use_swiotlb(struct scatterlist *sg)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+static inline void sg_dma_mark_use_swiotlb(struct scatterlist *sg)
+{
+}
+#endif
+
/*
* CONFIG_PCI_P2PDMA depends on CONFIG_64BIT which means there is 4 bytes
* in struct scatterlist (assuming also CONFIG_NEED_SG_DMA_LENGTH is set).
@@ -256,8 +279,6 @@ static inline void sg_unmark_end(struct scatterlist *sg)
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_P2PDMA
-#define SG_DMA_BUS_ADDRESS (1 << 0)
-
/**
* sg_dma_is_bus address - Return whether a given segment was marked
* as a bus address
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list