Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v9 1/9] memory: add section range info for IOMMU notifier

[Peter Xu]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:56:54AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 03:09:50PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 02:39:22PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 06:59:07PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > In this patch, IOMMUNotifier.{start|end} are introduced to store section
> > > > information for a specific notifier. When notification occurs, we not
> > > > only check the notification type (MAP|UNMAP), but also check whether the
> > > > notified iova range overlaps with the range of specific IOMMU notifier,
> > > > and skip those notifiers if not in the listened range.
> > > > 
> > > > When removing an region, we need to make sure we removed the correct
> > > > VFIOGuestIOMMU by checking the IOMMUNotifier.start address as well.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch is solving the problem that vfio-pci devices receive
> > > > duplicated UNMAP notification on x86 platform when vIOMMU is there. The
> > > > issue is that x86 IOMMU has a (0, 2^64-1) IOMMU region, which is
> > > > splitted by the (0xfee00000, 0xfeefffff) IRQ region. AFAIK
> > > > this (splitted IOMMU region) is only happening on x86.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch also helps vhost to leverage the new interface as well, so
> > > > that vhost won't get duplicated cache flushes. In that sense, it's an
> > > > slight performance improvement.
> > > > 
> > > > Suggested-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <address@hidden>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden>
> > > > Acked-by: Alex Williamson <address@hidden>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <address@hidden>
> > > > ---
> > > >  hw/vfio/common.c      | 12 +++++++++---
> > > >  hw/virtio/vhost.c     | 10 ++++++++--
> > > >  include/exec/memory.h | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > > >  memory.c              |  9 +++++++++
> > > >  4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/hw/vfio/common.c b/hw/vfio/common.c
> > > > index f3ba9b9..6b33b9f 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/vfio/common.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/vfio/common.c
> > > > @@ -478,8 +478,13 @@ static void 
> > > > vfio_listener_region_add(MemoryListener *listener,
> > > >          giommu->iommu_offset = section->offset_within_address_space -
> > > >                                 section->offset_within_region;
> > > >          giommu->container = container;
> > > > -        giommu->n.notify = vfio_iommu_map_notify;
> > > > -        giommu->n.notifier_flags = IOMMU_NOTIFIER_ALL;
> > > > +        llend = 
> > > > int128_add(int128_make64(section->offset_within_region),
> > > > +                           section->size);
> > > > +        llend = int128_sub(llend, int128_one());
> > > > +        iommu_notifier_init(&giommu->n, vfio_iommu_map_notify,
> > > > +                            IOMMU_NOTIFIER_ALL,
> > > > +                            section->offset_within_region,
> > > > +                            int128_get64(llend));
> > > 
> > > Seems to me it would make sense to put the fiddling around to convert
> > > the MemoryRegionSection into the necessary values would make sense to
> > > go inside iommu_notifier_init().
> > 
> > But will we always get one MemoryRegionSection if we are not in any of
> > the region_{add|del} callback? E.g., what if we want to init an IOMMU
> > notifier that covers just the whole IOMMU region range?
> 
> I suppose so.  It's just the only likely users of the interface I can
> see will be always doing this from region_{add,del}.
> 
> > Considering above, I would still slightly prefer current interface.
> 
> Ok, well my opinion on the matter isn't terribly strong.

Hi, David,

Sorry to respond late (so that context might be lost). Just want to
make sure that you are okay with current patch and interface, right?

I think Marcel is going to merge it if np, and I would like to have
your confirmation on this before the merge. Thanks!

-- 
Peter Xu