[PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-sva: Enable Hardware Access and Hardware Dirty bits
Pranjal Shrivastava
praan at google.com
Mon May 11 06:22:23 PDT 2026
On Sat, May 09, 2026 at 12:56:57AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 03:24:32PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > On 2026-05-08 2:57 pm, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > > I see, so IIUC, you mean if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_HW_AFDBM) but CPU
> > > doesn't enable HTTU, it is perfectly safe to let the SMMU do HTT updates,
> > > Since the fault handlers are already expecting HW-triggered updates?
> > >
> > > Which means our check would be something like:
> > >
> > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_HW_AFDBM) {
> > > if (smmu->features & FEAT_HA)
> > > ...
> > > }
> > >
> > > instead of cpu_has_hw_af()?
> >
> > Hmm, looking closer, cpu_has_hw_af() is the thing which actually influences
> > mm behaviour (via arch_has_hw_pte_young and arch_wants_old_prefaulted_pte),
> > and that can still be false at runtime if ARM64_HW_AFDBM is enabled but any
> > CPU doesn't support HAFDBS, so perhaps you were right the first time :)
>
> IIUIC, v2 should be:
>
> + /*
> + * Enable Hardware Access and Dirty updates (DBM) if supported by
> + * both the SMMU and the CPU. It is unsafe to enable SMMU's HTTU,
> + * if the CPU does not support it as it bypasses mm page aging.
> + */
> + if (cpu_has_hw_af()) {
Ack, yes. IMO, this is the correct system-wide gate.
> + if (master->smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_HA)
> + target->data[0] |= cpu_to_le64(CTXDESC_CD_0_TCR_HA);
> + if (master->smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_HD)
> + target->data[0] |= cpu_to_le64(CTXDESC_CD_0_TCR_HD);
> + }
>
Thanks,
Praan
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list