[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to all
From: |
Yu Zhang |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width. |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:47:14 +0800 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20180622-66-b94505 |
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 02:29:02PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 21:05:39 +0800
> Yu Zhang <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > A 5-level paging capable VM may choose to use 57-bit IOVA address width.
> > E.g. guest applications may prefer to use its VA as IOVA when performing
> > VFIO map/unmap operations, to avoid the burden of managing the IOVA space.
> >
> > This patch extends the current vIOMMU logic to cover the extended address
> > width. When creating a VM with 5-level paging feature, one can choose to
> > create a virtual VTD with 5-level paging capability, with configurations
> > like "-device intel-iommu,x-aw-bits=57".
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yu Zhang <address@hidden>
> > Reviewed-by: Peter Xu <address@hidden>
> > ---
> > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Richard Henderson <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Peter Xu <address@hidden>
> > ---
> > hw/i386/intel_iommu.c | 53
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h | 10 ++++++--
> > include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> > index 0e88c63..871110c 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> > +++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> > @@ -664,16 +664,16 @@ static inline bool vtd_iova_range_check(uint64_t
> > iova, VTDContextEntry *ce,
> >
> > /*
> > * Rsvd field masks for spte:
> > - * Index [1] to [4] 4k pages
> > - * Index [5] to [8] large pages
> > + * Index [1] to [5] 4k pages
> > + * Index [6] to [10] large pages
> > */
> > -static uint64_t vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[9];
> > +static uint64_t vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[11];
> >
> > static bool vtd_slpte_nonzero_rsvd(uint64_t slpte, uint32_t level)
> > {
> > if (slpte & VTD_SL_PT_PAGE_SIZE_MASK) {
> > /* Maybe large page */
> > - return slpte & vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[level + 4];
> > + return slpte & vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[level + 5];
> > } else {
> > return slpte & vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[level];
> > }
> > @@ -3127,6 +3127,8 @@ static void vtd_init(IntelIOMMUState *s)
> > VTD_CAP_SAGAW_39bit | VTD_CAP_MGAW(s->aw_bits);
> > if (s->aw_bits == VTD_AW_48BIT) {
> > s->cap |= VTD_CAP_SAGAW_48bit;
> > + } else if (s->aw_bits == VTD_AW_57BIT) {
> > + s->cap |= VTD_CAP_SAGAW_57bit | VTD_CAP_SAGAW_48bit;
> > }
> > s->ecap = VTD_ECAP_QI | VTD_ECAP_IRO;
> > s->haw_bits = cpu->phys_bits;
> > @@ -3139,10 +3141,12 @@ static void vtd_init(IntelIOMMUState *s)
> > vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[2] =
> > VTD_SPTE_PAGE_L2_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[3] =
> > VTD_SPTE_PAGE_L3_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[4] =
> > VTD_SPTE_PAGE_L4_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > - vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[5] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L1_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > - vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[6] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L2_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > - vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[7] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L3_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > - vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[8] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L4_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > + vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[5] =
> > VTD_SPTE_PAGE_L5_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > + vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[6] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L1_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > + vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[7] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L2_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > + vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[8] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L3_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > + vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[9] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L4_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> > + vtd_paging_entry_rsvd_field[10] =
> > VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L5_RSVD_MASK(s->haw_bits);
> >
> > if (x86_iommu->intr_supported) {
> > s->ecap |= VTD_ECAP_IR | VTD_ECAP_MHMV;
> > @@ -3241,6 +3245,23 @@ static AddressSpace *vtd_host_dma_iommu(PCIBus *bus,
> > void *opaque, int devfn)
> > return &vtd_as->as;
> > }
> >
> > +static bool host_has_la57(void)
> > +{
> > + uint32_t ecx, unused;
> > +
> > + host_cpuid(7, 0, &unused, &unused, &ecx, &unused);
> > + return ecx & CPUID_7_0_ECX_LA57;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool guest_has_la57(void)
> > +{
> > + CPUState *cs = first_cpu;
> > + X86CPU *cpu = X86_CPU(cs);
> > + CPUX86State *env = &cpu->env;
> > +
> > + return env->features[FEAT_7_0_ECX] & CPUID_7_0_ECX_LA57;
> > +}
> another direct access to CPU fields,
> I'd suggest to set this value when iommu is created
> i.e. add 'la57' property and set from iommu owner.
>
Sorry, do you mean "-device intel-iommu,la57"? I think we do not need
that, because a 5-level capable vIOMMU can be created with properties
like "-device intel-iommu,x-aw-bits=57".
The guest CPU fields are checked to make sure the VM has LA57 CPU feature,
because I believe there shall be no 5-level IOMMU on platforms without LA57
CPUs.
> > static bool vtd_decide_config(IntelIOMMUState *s, Error **errp)
> > {
> > X86IOMMUState *x86_iommu = X86_IOMMU_DEVICE(s);
> > @@ -3267,11 +3288,19 @@ static bool vtd_decide_config(IntelIOMMUState *s,
> > Error **errp)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - /* Currently only address widths supported are 39 and 48 bits */
> > + /* Currently address widths supported are 39, 48, and 57 bits */
> > if ((s->aw_bits != VTD_AW_39BIT) &&
> > - (s->aw_bits != VTD_AW_48BIT)) {
> > - error_setg(errp, "Supported values for x-aw-bits are: %d, %d",
> > - VTD_AW_39BIT, VTD_AW_48BIT);
> > + (s->aw_bits != VTD_AW_48BIT) &&
> > + (s->aw_bits != VTD_AW_57BIT)) {
> > + error_setg(errp, "Supported values for x-aw-bits are: %d, %d, %d",
> > + VTD_AW_39BIT, VTD_AW_48BIT, VTD_AW_57BIT);
> > + return false;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if ((s->aw_bits == VTD_AW_57BIT) &&
> > + !(host_has_la57() && guest_has_la57())) {
> Does iommu supposed to work in TCG mode?
> If yes then why it should care about host_has_la57()?
>
Hmm... I did not take TCG mode into consideration. And host_has_la57() is
used to guarantee the host have la57 feature so that iommu shadowing works
for device assignment.
I guess iommu shall work in TCG mode(though I am not quite sure about this).
But I do not have any usage case of a 5-level vIOMMU in TCG in mind. So maybe
we can:
1> check the 'ms->accel' in vtd_decide_config() and do not care about host
capability if it is TCG.
2> Or, we can choose to keep as it is, and add the check when 5-level paging
vIOMMU does have usage in TCG?
But as to the check of guest capability, I still believe it is necessary. As
said, a VM without LA57 feature shall not see a VT-d with 5-level IOMMU.
> > + error_setg(errp, "Do not support 57-bit DMA address, unless both "
> > + "host and guest are capable of 5-level paging");
> > return false;
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h b/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
> > index d084099..2b29b6f 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
> > +++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
> > @@ -114,8 +114,8 @@
> > VTD_INTERRUPT_ADDR_FIRST + 1)
> >
> > /* The shift of source_id in the key of IOTLB hash table */
> > -#define VTD_IOTLB_SID_SHIFT 36
> > -#define VTD_IOTLB_LVL_SHIFT 52
> > +#define VTD_IOTLB_SID_SHIFT 45
> > +#define VTD_IOTLB_LVL_SHIFT 61
> > #define VTD_IOTLB_MAX_SIZE 1024 /* Max size of the hash table
> > */
> >
> > /* IOTLB_REG */
> > @@ -212,6 +212,8 @@
> > #define VTD_CAP_SAGAW_39bit (0x2ULL << VTD_CAP_SAGAW_SHIFT)
> > /* 48-bit AGAW, 4-level page-table */
> > #define VTD_CAP_SAGAW_48bit (0x4ULL << VTD_CAP_SAGAW_SHIFT)
> > + /* 57-bit AGAW, 5-level page-table */
> > +#define VTD_CAP_SAGAW_57bit (0x8ULL << VTD_CAP_SAGAW_SHIFT)
> >
> > /* IQT_REG */
> > #define VTD_IQT_QT(val) (((val) >> 4) & 0x7fffULL)
> > @@ -379,6 +381,8 @@ typedef union VTDInvDesc VTDInvDesc;
> > (0x800ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> > #define VTD_SPTE_PAGE_L4_RSVD_MASK(aw) \
> > (0x880ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> > +#define VTD_SPTE_PAGE_L5_RSVD_MASK(aw) \
> > + (0x880ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> > #define VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L1_RSVD_MASK(aw) \
> > (0x800ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> > #define VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L2_RSVD_MASK(aw) \
> > @@ -387,6 +391,8 @@ typedef union VTDInvDesc VTDInvDesc;
> > (0x3ffff800ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> > #define VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L4_RSVD_MASK(aw) \
> > (0x880ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> > +#define VTD_SPTE_LPAGE_L5_RSVD_MASK(aw) \
> > + (0x880ULL | ~(VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) | VTD_SL_IGN_COM))
> >
> > /* Information about page-selective IOTLB invalidate */
> > struct VTDIOTLBPageInvInfo {
> > diff --git a/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h b/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> > index 820451c..7474c4f 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> > @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@
> > #define DMAR_REG_SIZE 0x230
> > #define VTD_AW_39BIT 39
> > #define VTD_AW_48BIT 48
> > +#define VTD_AW_57BIT 57
> > #define VTD_ADDRESS_WIDTH VTD_AW_39BIT
> > #define VTD_HAW_MASK(aw) ((1ULL << (aw)) - 1)
> >
>
>
B.R.
Yu
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Yu Zhang, 2018/12/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Igor Mammedov, 2018/12/17
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width.,
Yu Zhang <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Yu Zhang, 2018/12/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/12/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Yu Zhang, 2018/12/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/12/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Yu Zhang, 2018/12/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/12/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Yu Zhang, 2018/12/19
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/12/19
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Yu Zhang, 2018/12/20
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] intel-iommu: extend VTD emulation to allow 57-bit IOVA address width., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/12/20