Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] VFIO Type1 IOMMU change: to support with iommu and without iommu

[Neo Jia]

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 01:05:52PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2016 08:00:36 +0000
> "Tian, Kevin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > > From: Alex Williamson [mailto:address@hidden
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 6:06 AM
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:15:15 +0800
> > > Jike Song <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > On 05/11/2016 12:02 AM, Neo Jia wrote:  
> > > > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:52:27PM +0800, Jike Song wrote:  
> > > > >> On 05/05/2016 05:27 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:  
> > > > >>>> From: Song, Jike
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> IIUC, an api-only domain is a VFIO domain *without* underlying 
> > > > >>>> IOMMU
> > > > >>>> hardware. It just, as you said in another mail, "rather than
> > > > >>>> programming them into an IOMMU for a device, it simply stores the
> > > > >>>> translations for use by later requests".
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> That imposes a constraint on gfx driver: hardware IOMMU must be 
> > > > >>>> disabled.
> > > > >>>> Otherwise, if IOMMU is present, the gfx driver eventually programs
> > > > >>>> the hardware IOMMU with IOVA returned by pci_map_page or 
> > > > >>>> dma_map_page;
> > > > >>>> Meanwhile, the IOMMU backend for vgpu only maintains GPA <-> HPA
> > > > >>>> translations without any knowledge about hardware IOMMU, how is the
> > > > >>>> device model supposed to do to get an IOVA for a given GPA 
> > > > >>>> (thereby HPA
> > > > >>>> by the IOMMU backend here)?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> If things go as guessed above, as vfio_pin_pages() indicates, it
> > > > >>>> pin & translate vaddr to PFN, then it will be very difficult for 
> > > > >>>> the
> > > > >>>> device model to figure out:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>    1, for a given GPA, how to avoid calling dma_map_page multiple 
> > > > >>>> times?
> > > > >>>>    2, for which page to call dma_unmap_page?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> --  
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> We have to support both w/ iommu and w/o iommu case, since
> > > > >>> that fact is out of GPU driver control. A simple way is to use
> > > > >>> dma_map_page which internally will cope with w/ and w/o iommu
> > > > >>> case gracefully, i.e. return HPA w/o iommu and IOVA w/ iommu.
> > > > >>> Then in this file we only need to cache GPA to whatever dmadr_t
> > > > >>> returned by dma_map_page.
> > > > >>>  
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi Alex, Kirti and Neo, any thought on the IOMMU compatibility here? 
> > > > >>  
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Jike,
> > > > >
> > > > > With mediated passthru, you still can use hardware iommu, but more 
> > > > > important
> > > > > that part is actually orthogonal to what we are discussing here as we 
> > > > > will only
> > > > > cache the mapping between <gfn (iova if guest has iommu), (qemu) va>, 
> > > > > once we
> > > > > have pinned pages later with the help of above info, you can map it 
> > > > > into the
> > > > > proper iommu domain if the system has configured so.
> > > > >  
> > > >
> > > > Hi Neo,
> > > >
> > > > Technically yes you can map a pfn into the proper IOMMU domain 
> > > > elsewhere,
> > > > but to find out whether a pfn was previously mapped or not, you have to
> > > > track it with another rbtree-alike data structure (the IOMMU driver 
> > > > simply
> > > > doesn't bother with tracking), that seems somehow duplicate with the 
> > > > vGPU
> > > > IOMMU backend we are discussing here.
> > > >
> > > > And it is also semantically correct for an IOMMU backend to handle both 
> > > > w/
> > > > and w/o an IOMMU hardware? :)  
> > > 
> > > A problem with the iommu doing the dma_map_page() though is for what
> > > device does it do this?  In the mediated case the vfio infrastructure
> > > is dealing with a software representation of a device.  For all we
> > > know that software model could transparently migrate from one physical
> > > GPU to another.  There may not even be a physical device backing
> > > the mediated device.  Those are details left to the vgpu driver itself.  
> > 
> > This is a fair argument. VFIO iommu driver simply serves user space
> > requests, where only vaddr<->iova (essentially gpa in kvm case) is
> > mattered. How iova is mapped into real IOMMU is not VFIO's interest.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Perhaps one possibility would be to allow the vgpu driver to register
> > > map and unmap callbacks.  The unmap callback might provide the
> > > invalidation interface that we're so far missing.  The combination of
> > > map and unmap callbacks might simplify the Intel approach of pinning the
> > > entire VM memory space, ie. for each map callback do a translation
> > > (pin) and dma_map_page, for each unmap do a dma_unmap_page and release
> > > the translation.  There's still the problem of where that dma_addr_t
> > > from the dma_map_page is stored though.  Someone would need to keep
> > > track of iova to dma_addr_t.  The vfio iommu might be a place to do
> > > that since we're already tracking information based on iova, possibly
> > > in an opaque data element provided by the vgpu driver.  However, we're
> > > going to need to take a serious look at whether an rb-tree is the right
> > > data structure for the job.  It works well for the current type1
> > > functionality where we typically have tens of entries.  I think the
> > > NVIDIA model of sparse pinning the VM is pushing that up to tens of
> > > thousands.  If Intel intends to pin the entire guest, that's
> > > potentially tens of millions of tracked entries and I don't know that
> > > an rb-tree is the right tool for that job.  Thanks,
> > >   
> > 
> > Based on above thought I'm thinking whether below would work:
> > (let's use gpa to replace existing iova in type1 driver, while using iova
> > for the one actually used in vGPU driver. Assume 'pin-all' scenario first
> > which matches existing vfio logic)
> > 
> > - No change to existing vfio_dma structure. VFIO still maintains gpa<->vaddr
> > mapping, in coarse-grained regions;
> > 
> > - Leverage same page accounting/pinning logic in type1 driver, which 
> > should be enough for 'pin-all' usage;
> > 
> > - Then main divergence point for vGPU would be in vfio_unmap_unpin
> > and vfio_iommu_map. I'm not sure whether it's easy to fake an 
> > iommu_domain for vGPU so same iommu_map/unmap can be reused.
> 
> This seems troublesome.  Kirti's version used numerous api-only tests
> to avoid these which made the code difficult to trace.  Clearly one
> option is to split out the common code so that a new mediated-type1
> backend skips this, but they thought they could clean it up without
> this, so we'll see what happens in the next version.
> 
> > If not, we may introduce two new map/unmap callbacks provided
> > specifically by vGPU core driver, as you suggested:
> > 
> >     * vGPU core driver uses dma_map_page to map specified pfns:
> > 
> >             o When IOMMU is enabled, we'll get an iova returned different
> > from pfn;
> >             o When IOMMU is disabled, returned iova is same as pfn;
> 
> Either way each iova needs to be stored and we have a worst case of one
> iova per page of guest memory.
>  
> >     * Then vGPU core driver just maintains its own gpa<->iova lookup
> > table (e.g. called vgpu_dma)
> > 
> >     * Because each vfio_iommu_map invocation is about a contiguous 
> > region, we can expect same number of vgpu_dma entries as maintained 
> > for vfio_dma list;
> >
> > Then it's vGPU core driver's responsibility to provide gpa<->iova
> > lookup for vendor specific GPU driver. And we don't need worry about
> > tens of thousands of entries. Once we get this simple 'pin-all' model
> > ready, then it can be further extended to support 'pin-sparse'
> > scenario. We still maintain a top-level vgpu_dma list with each entry to
> > further link its own sparse mapping structure. In reality I don't expect
> > we really need to maintain per-page translation even with sparse pinning.
> 
> If you're trying to equate the scale of what we need to track vs what
> type1 currently tracks, they're significantly different.  Possible
> things we need to track include the pfn, the iova, and possibly a
> reference count or some sort of pinned page map.  In the pin-all model
> we can assume that every page is pinned on map and unpinned on unmap,
> so a reference count or map is unnecessary.  We can also assume that we
> can always regenerate the pfn with get_user_pages() from the vaddr, so
> we don't need to track that.  

Hi Alex,

Thanks for pointing this out, we will not track those in our next rev and
get_user_pages will be used from the vaddr as you suggested to handle the
single VM with both passthru + mediated device case.

Thanks,
Neo

> I don't see any way around tracking the
> iova.  The iommu can't tell us this like it can with the normal type1
> model because the pfn is the result of the translation, not the key for
> the translation. So we're always going to have between 1 and
> (size/PAGE_SIZE) iova entries per vgpu_dma entry.  You might be able to
> manage the vgpu_dma with an rb-tree, but each vgpu_dma entry needs some
> data structure tracking every iova.
> 
> Sparse mapping has the same issue but of course the tree of iovas is
> potentially incomplete and we need a way to determine where it's
> incomplete.  A page table rooted in the vgpu_dma and indexed by the
> offset from the start vaddr seems like the way to go here.  It's also
> possible that some mediated device models might store the iova in the
> command sent to the device and therefore be able to parse those entries
> back out to unmap them without storing them separately.  This might be
> how the s390 channel-io model would prefer to work.  That seems like
> further validation that such tracking is going to be dependent on the
> mediated driver itself and probably not something to centralize in a
> mediated iommu driver.  Thanks,

> 
> Alex