[PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu: Properly initialize CBAR MemAttr

[Robin Murphy]

On 30/05/16 15:15, Bogdan Purcareata wrote:
> Currently, when initializing the CBAR memattr attributes to the weakest
> values, it is expected that the final ones will be declared in the TTBCR
> register (SMMU_CBn_TCR).

You mean the stage 1 PTE, right? TTBCR only controls the attributes for 
table walks.

> This is not required when CBAR type consists of a stage 1 translation
> followed by a stage 2 bypass.

On the contrary, this is _only_ required for stage 1 translation with 
stage 2 bypass - CBAR.MemAttr gives the _stage 2_ memory type (see 
section 2.4 "Memory type and shareability attribute determination" in 
the SMMU spec). For nested translation the stage 2 attributes come from 
the stage 2 context itself.

>                               This is the case when assigning a VFIO PCI
> device to a KVM guest. Overriding the default transaction attributes to
> writeback cacheable results in the device no longer working in the guest
> (the adapter requires explicit flushes on the descriptor rings memory).

 From that, the real problem is almost certainly that you're erroneously 
describing the device as coherent or non-coherent (whichever it actually 
isn't) somewhere.

> Update the context init routine to initialize the CBAR MemAttr field only
> if there's a stage 1 followed by a stage 2 translation.

The CBAR.MemAttr field doesn't even exist in that format - it's a good 
thing that we don't actually implement nested translation (we currently 
just use a stage 2 context instead), because this would end up 
corrupting CBAR.CBNDX (i.e. the stage 2 context bank index). Now that I 
should probably fix...

> Signed-off-by: Bogdan Purcareata <bogdan.purcareata at nxp.com>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 13 +++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> index ff7a392..1400ec9 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> @@ -765,13 +765,14 @@ static void arm_smmu_init_context_bank(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain,
>   {
>   	u32 reg;
>   	u64 reg64;
> -	bool stage1;
> +	bool stage1, stage1_stage2;
>   	struct arm_smmu_cfg *cfg = &smmu_domain->cfg;
>   	struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
>   	void __iomem *cb_base, *gr1_base;
>
>   	gr1_base = ARM_SMMU_GR1(smmu);
>   	stage1 = cfg->cbar != CBAR_TYPE_S2_TRANS;
> +	stage1_stage2 = cfg->cbar == CBAR_TYPE_S1_TRANS_S2_TRANS;
>   	cb_base = ARM_SMMU_CB_BASE(smmu) + ARM_SMMU_CB(smmu, cfg->cbndx);
>
>   	if (smmu->version > ARM_SMMU_V1) {
> @@ -793,15 +794,19 @@ static void arm_smmu_init_context_bank(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain,
>
>   	/*
>   	 * Use the weakest shareability/memory types, so they are
> -	 * overridden by the ttbcr/pte.
> +	 * overridden by the ttbcr/pte. This happens only if the stage
> +	 * 1 is followed by a stage 2 translation.
>   	 */
> -	if (stage1) {
> +	if (stage1_stage2) {
>   		reg |= (CBAR_S1_BPSHCFG_NSH << CBAR_S1_BPSHCFG_SHIFT) |
>   			(CBAR_S1_MEMATTR_WB << CBAR_S1_MEMATTR_SHIFT);
> -	} else if (!(smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_VMID16)) {

Since MemAttr is initially zero, the net result of this is that *all* 
stage 1 transactions will now get overridden to Strongly-Ordered. That 
may hide your problem, but it's definitely not the correct thing to do.

Robin.

> +	}
> +
> +	if (!stage1 && !(smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_VMID16)) {
>   		/* 8-bit VMIDs live in CBAR */
>   		reg |= ARM_SMMU_CB_VMID(smmu, cfg) << CBAR_VMID_SHIFT;
>   	}
> +
>   	writel_relaxed(reg, gr1_base + ARM_SMMU_GR1_CBAR(cfg->cbndx));
>
>   	/* TTBRs */
>