RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v9 1/9] hw/vfio/common: Remove error print on mmio region translation by viommu

[Bharat Bhushan]

Hi Eric/Alex,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Williamson <address@hidden>
> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 11:23 PM
> To: Auger Eric <address@hidden>
> Cc: Bharat Bhushan <address@hidden>; address@hidden;
> address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden;
> address@hidden; Tomasz Nowicki [C] <address@hidden>;
> address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden; qemu-
> address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden;
> address@hidden; David Gibson <address@hidden>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v9 1/9] hw/vfio/common: Remove error print on mmio
> region translation by viommu
> 
> External Email
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 18:35:48 +0100
> Auger Eric <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > On 3/24/20 12:08 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > [Cc +dwg who originated this warning]
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:16:09 +0530
> > > Bharat Bhushan <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On ARM, the MSI doorbell is translated by the virtual IOMMU.
> > >> As such address_space_translate() returns the MSI controller MMIO
> > >> region and we get an "iommu map to non memory area"
> > >> message. Let's remove this latter.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <address@hidden>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <address@hidden>
> > >> ---
> > >>  hw/vfio/common.c | 2 --
> > >>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/hw/vfio/common.c b/hw/vfio/common.c index
> > >> 5ca11488d6..c586edf47a 100644
> > >> --- a/hw/vfio/common.c
> > >> +++ b/hw/vfio/common.c
> > >> @@ -426,8 +426,6 @@ static bool vfio_get_vaddr(IOMMUTLBEntry *iotlb,
> void **vaddr,
> > >>                                   &xlat, &len, writable,
> > >>                                   MEMTXATTRS_UNSPECIFIED);
> > >>      if (!memory_region_is_ram(mr)) {
> > >> -        error_report("iommu map to non memory area %"HWADDR_PRIx"",
> > >> -                     xlat);
> > >>          return false;
> > >>      }
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'm a bit confused here, I think we need more justification beyond
> > > "we hit this warning and we don't want to because it's ok in this
> > > one special case, therefore remove it".  I assume the special case
> > > is that the device MSI address is managed via the SET_IRQS ioctl and
> > > therefore we won't actually get DMAs to this range.
> > Yes exactly. The guest creates a mapping between one giova and this
> > gpa (corresponding to the MSI controller doorbell) because MSIs are
> > mapped on ARM. But practically the physical device is programmed with
> > an host chosen iova that maps onto the physical MSI controller's
> > doorbell. so the device never performs DMA accesses to this range.
> >
> >   But I imagine the case that
> > > was in mind when adding this warning was general peer-to-peer
> > > between and assigned and emulated device.
> > yes makes sense.
> >
> >   Maybe there's an argument to be made
> > > that such a p2p mapping might also be used in a non-vIOMMU case.  We
> > > skip creating those mappings and drivers continue to work, maybe
> > > because nobody attempts to do p2p DMA with the types of devices we
> > > emulate, maybe because p2p DMA is not absolutely reliable on bare
> > > metal and drivers test it before using it.
> > MSI doorbells are mapped using the IOMMU_MMIO flag (dma-iommu.c
> > iommu_dma_get_msi_page).
> > One idea could be to pass that flag through the IOMMU Notifier
> > mechanism into the iotlb->perm. Eventually when we get this in
> > vfio_get_vaddr() we would not print the warning. Could that make sense?
> 
> Yeah, if we can identify a valid case that doesn't need a warning, that's 
> fine by me.
> Thanks,

Let me know if I understood the proposal correctly:

virtio-iommu driver in guest will make map (VIRTIO_IOMMU_T_MAP) with 
VIRTIO_IOMMU_MAP_F_MMIO flag for MSI mapping.
In qemu, virtio-iommu device will set a new defined flag (say IOMMU_MMIO) in 
iotlb->perm in memory_region_notify_iommu(). vfio_get_vaddr() will check same 
flag and will not print the warning.

Is above correct?

Thanks
-Bharat

> 
> Alex