qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] i386/pc: Account IOVA reserved ranges above 4G bound


From: Igor Mammedov
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] i386/pc: Account IOVA reserved ranges above 4G boundary
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:09:22 +0200

On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 10:51:59 +0100
Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com> wrote:

> On 6/23/21 10:03 AM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:49:00 +0100
> > Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> It is assumed that the whole GPA space is available to be
> >> DMA addressable, within a given address space limit. Since
> >> v5.4 based that is not true, and VFIO will validate whether
> >> the selected IOVA is indeed valid i.e. not reserved by IOMMU
> >> on behalf of some specific devices or platform-defined.
> >>
> >> AMD systems with an IOMMU are examples of such platforms and
> >> particularly may export only these ranges as allowed:
> >>
> >>    0000000000000000 - 00000000fedfffff (0      .. 3.982G)
> >>    00000000fef00000 - 000000fcffffffff (3.983G .. 1011.9G)
> >>    0000010000000000 - ffffffffffffffff (1Tb    .. 16Pb)
> >>
> >> We already know of accounting for the 4G hole, albeit if the
> >> guest is big enough we will fail to allocate a >1010G given
> >> the ~12G hole at the 1Tb boundary, reserved for HyperTransport.
> >>
> >> When creating the region above 4G, take into account what
> >> IOVAs are allowed by defining the known allowed ranges
> >> and search for the next free IOVA ranges. When finding a
> >> invalid IOVA we mark them as reserved and proceed to the
> >> next allowed IOVA region.
> >>
> >> After accounting for the 1Tb hole on AMD hosts, mtree should
> >> look like:
> >>
> >> 0000000100000000-000000fcffffffff (prio 0, i/o):
> >>    alias ram-above-4g @pc.ram 0000000080000000-000000fc7fffffff
> >> 0000010000000000-000001037fffffff (prio 0, i/o):
> >>    alias ram-above-1t @pc.ram 000000fc80000000-000000ffffffffff  
> > 
> > You are talking here about GPA which is guest specific thing
> > and then somehow it becomes tied to host. For bystanders it's
> > not clear from above commit message how both are related.
> > I'd add here an explicit explanation how AMD host is related GPAs
> > and clarify where you are talking about guest/host side.
> >   
> OK, makes sense.
> 
> Perhaps using IOVA makes it easier to understand. I said GPA because
> there's an 1:1 mapping between GPA and IOVA (if you're not using vIOMMU).

IOVA may be a too broad term, maybe explain it in terms of GPA and HPA
and why it does matter on each side (host/guest)


> > also what about usecases:
> >  * start QEMU with Intel cpu model on AMD host with intel's iommu  
> 
> In principle it would be less likely to occur. But you would still need
> to mark the same range as reserved. The limitation is on DMA occuring
> on those IOVAs (host or guest) coinciding with that range, so you would
> want to inform the guest that at least those should be avoided.
> 
> >  * start QEMU with AMD cpu model and AMD's iommu on Intel host  
> 
> Here you would probably only mark the range, solely for honoring how hardware
> is usually represented. But really, on Intel, nothing stops you from exposing 
> the
> aforementioned range as RAM.
> 
> >  * start QEMU in TCG mode on AMD host (mostly form qtest point ot view)
> >   
> This one is tricky. Because you can hotplug a VFIO device later on,
> I opted for always marking the reserved range. If you don't use VFIO you're 
> good, but
> otherwise you would still need reserved. But I am not sure how qtest is used
> today for testing huge guests.
I do not know if there are VFIO tests in qtest (probably nope, since that
could require a host configured for that), but we can add a test
for his memory quirk (assuming phys-bits won't get in the way)




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]