Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 0/3] IOMMU: intel_iommu support map and unmap notifications

[Aviv B.D.]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Alex Williamson <address@hidden
> wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:54:56 +0200
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:44:47PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 21:20:36 +0200
> > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 09:04:13AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 17:54:35 +0200
> > > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 08:30:21AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 17:14:24 +0200
> > > > > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 01:04:21PM +0200, Aviv B.D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > From: "Aviv Ben-David" <address@hidden>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > * Advertize Cache Mode capability in iommu cap register.
> > > > > > > > >   This capability is controlled by "cache-mode" property
> of intel-iommu device.
> > > > > > > > >   To enable this option call QEMU with "-device
> intel-iommu,cache-mode=true".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > * On page cache invalidation in intel vIOMMU, check if the
> domain belong to
> > > > > > > > >   registered notifier, and notify accordingly.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This looks sane I think. Alex, care to comment?
> > > > > > > > Merging will have to wait until after the release.
> > > > > > > > Pls remember to re-test and re-ping then.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think it's suitable for upstream until there's a
> reasonable
> > > > > > > replay mechanism
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Could you pls clarify what do you mean by replay?
> > > > > > Is this when you attach a device by hotplug to
> > > > > > a running system?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If yes this can maybe be addressed by disabling hotplug
> temporarily.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, hotplug is not required, moving a device between existing
> domains
> > > > > requires replay, ie. actually using it for nested device
> assignment.
> > > >
> > > > Good point, that one is a correctness thing. Aviv,
> > > > could you add this in TODO list in a cover letter pls?
> > > >
> > > > > > > and we straighten out whether it's expected to get
> > > > > > > multiple notifies and the notif-ee is responsible for filtering
> > > > > > > them or if the notif-er should do filtering.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK this is a documentation thing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well no, it needs to be decided and if necessary implemented.
> > > >
> > > > Let's assume it's the notif-ee for now. Less is more and all that.
> > >
> > > I think this is opposite of the approach dwg suggested.
> > >
> > > > > > >  Without those, this is
> > > > > > > effectively just an RFC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's infrastructure without users so it doesn't break things,
> > > > > > I'm more interested in seeing whether it's broken in
> > > > > > some way than whether it's complete.
> > > > >
> > > > > If it allows use with vfio but doesn't fully implement the
> complete set
> > > > > of interfaces, it does break things.  We currently prevent viommu
> usage
> > > > > with vfio because it is incomplete.
> > > >
> > > > Right - that bit is still in as far as I can see.
> > >
> > > Nope, 3/3 changes vtd_iommu_notify_flag_changed() to allow use with
> > > vfio even though it's still incomplete.  We would at least need
> > > something like a replay callback for VT-d that triggers an abort if you
> > > still want to accept it incomplete.  Thanks,
> > >
> > > Alex
> >
> > IIUC practically things seems to work, right?
>
> AFAIK, no.
>
> > So how about disabling by default with a flag for people that want to
> > experiment with it?
> > E.g. x-vfio-allow-broken-translations ?
>
> We've already been through one round of "intel-iommu is incomplete for
> use with device assignment, how can we prevent it from being used",
> which led to the notify_flag_changed callback on MemoryRegionIOMMUOps.
> This series now claims to fix that yet still doesn't provide a
> mechanism to do memory_region_iommu_replay() given that VT-d has a much
> larger address width.  Why is the onus on vfio to resolve this or
> provide some sort of workaround?  vfio is using the QEMU iommu
> interface correctly, intel-iommu is still incomplete. The least it
> could do is add an optional replay callback to MemoryRegionIOMMUOps
> that supersedes the existing memory_region_iommu_replay() code and
> triggers an abort when it gets called.  I don't know what an
> x-vfio-allow-broken-translations option would do, how I'd implement it,
> or why I'd bother to implement it.  Thanks,
>
> Alex
>

I'll implement your suggestion regarding the replay framwork.
Probably in another patch set, if it is OK?

Thanks,
Aviv.