diff mbox series

[V7,9/9] PCI/P2PDMA: Add a 10-Bit Tag check in P2PDMA

Message ID 1628084828-119542-10-git-send-email-liudongdong3@huawei.com
State New
Headers show
Series [V7,1/9] PCI: Use cached Device Capabilities Register | expand

Commit Message

Dongdong Liu Aug. 4, 2021, 1:47 p.m. UTC
Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with
10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not
support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should
emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to
disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.
"echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable
10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.

Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)

Comments

Dongdong Liu Aug. 5, 2021, 8:49 a.m. UTC | #1
Hi Logan

Many thanks for your review.
On 2021/8/4 23:56, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>

>

> On 2021-08-04 7:47 a.m., Dongdong Liu wrote:

>> Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with

>> 10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not

>> support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should

>> emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to

>> disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.

>> "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable

>> 10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.

>>

>> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>

>> ---

>>  drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>>  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)

>>

>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>> index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644

>> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@

>>  #include <linux/random.h>

>>  #include <linux/seq_buf.h>

>>  #include <linux/xarray.h>

>> +#include "pci.h"

>>

>>  enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {

>>  	PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,

>> @@ -410,6 +411,41 @@ static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)

>>  		(client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;

>>  }

>>

>> +static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,

>> +				   bool verbose)

>> +{

>> +	bool req;

>> +	bool comp;

>> +	u16 ctl2;

>> +

>> +	if (a->is_virtfn) {

>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV

>> +		req = !!(a->physfn->sriov->ctrl &

>> +			 PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VF_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);

>> +#endif

>> +	} else {

>> +		pcie_capability_read_word(a, PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2, &ctl2);

>> +		req = !!(ctl2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);

>> +	}

>> +

>> +	comp = !!(b->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_COMP);

>> +	if (req && (!comp)) {

>

> I think the brackets around !comp are unnecessary.

Yes, will fix.
>

>> +		if (verbose) {

>> +			pci_warn(a, "cannot be used for peer-to-peer DMA as 10-Bit Tag Requester enable is set in device (%s), but peer device (%s) does not support the 10-Bit Tag Completer\n",

>> +				 pci_name(a), pci_name(b));

>> +			if (a->is_virtfn)

>> +				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl\n",

>> +					 pci_name(a));

>> +			else

>> +				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/10bit_tag\n",

>> +					 pci_name(a));

>

> Can we not simplify this slightly by having a const char * set to the

> tag in the above if (a->is_virtfn)?

>

> pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 >

> /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/%s\n", pci_name(a), tag);

Good point, will fix.

Thanks,
Dongdong
>

>> +		}

>> +		return false;

>> +	}

>> +

>> +	return true;

>> +}

>> +

>>  /*

>>   * Calculate the P2PDMA mapping type and distance between two PCI devices.

>>   *

>> @@ -532,6 +568,10 @@ calc_map_type_and_dist(struct pci_dev *provider, struct pci_dev *client,

>>  		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>>  	}

>>  done:

>> +	if (!check_10bit_tags_vaild(client, provider, verbose) ||

>> +	    !check_10bit_tags_vaild(provider, client, verbose))

>> +		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>> +

>>  	rcu_read_lock();

>>  	p2pdma = rcu_dereference(provider->p2pdma);

>>  	if (p2pdma)

>>

> .

>
Bjorn Helgaas Aug. 5, 2021, 6:12 p.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 09:47:08PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:
> Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with

> 10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not

> support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should

> emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to

> disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.

> "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable

> 10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.


s/10-BIT/10-Bit/ several times.

Add blank lines between paragraphs.

> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>

> ---

>  drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)

> 

> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

> index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644

> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@

>  #include <linux/random.h>

>  #include <linux/seq_buf.h>

>  #include <linux/xarray.h>

> +#include "pci.h"

>  

>  enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {

>  	PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,

> @@ -410,6 +411,41 @@ static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)

>  		(client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;

>  }

>  

> +static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,


s/vaild/valid/

Or maybe s/valid/safe/ or s/valid/supported/, since "valid" isn't
quite the right word here.  We want to know whether the source is
enabled to generate 10-bit tags, and if so, whether the destination
can handle them.

"if (check_10bit_tags_valid())" does not make sense because
"check_10bit_tags_valid()" is not a question with a yes/no answer.

"10bit_tags_valid()" *might* be, because "if (10bit_tags_valid())"
makes sense.  But I don't think you can start with a digit.

Or maybe you want to invert the sense, e.g.,
"10bit_tags_unsupported()", since that avoids negation at the caller:

  if (10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||
      10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))
        map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

Doesn't this patch need to be at the very beginning, before you start
enabling 10-bit tags?  Otherwise there's a hole in the middle where we
enable them and P2P DMA might break.

> +				   bool verbose)

> +{

> +	bool req;

> +	bool comp;

> +	u16 ctl2;

> +

> +	if (a->is_virtfn) {

> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV

> +		req = !!(a->physfn->sriov->ctrl &

> +			 PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VF_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);

> +#endif

> +	} else {

> +		pcie_capability_read_word(a, PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2, &ctl2);

> +		req = !!(ctl2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);

> +	}

> +

> +	comp = !!(b->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_COMP);

> +	if (req && (!comp)) {

> +		if (verbose) {

> +			pci_warn(a, "cannot be used for peer-to-peer DMA as 10-Bit Tag Requester enable is set in device (%s), but peer device (%s) does not support the 10-Bit Tag Completer\n",

> +				 pci_name(a), pci_name(b));


No point in printing pci_name(a) twice.  pci_warn() prints it already;
that should be enough.

I think you can simplify this a little, e.g.,

  if (!req)           /* 10-bit tags not enabled on requester */
    return true;

  if (comp)           /* completer can handle anything */
    return true;

  /* error case */
  if (!verbose)
    return false;

  pci_warn(...);
  return false;

> +			if (a->is_virtfn)

> +				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl\n",

> +					 pci_name(a));

> +			else

> +				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/10bit_tag\n",

> +					 pci_name(a));

> +		}

> +		return false;

> +	}

> +

> +	return true;

> +}

> +

>  /*

>   * Calculate the P2PDMA mapping type and distance between two PCI devices.

>   *

> @@ -532,6 +568,10 @@ calc_map_type_and_dist(struct pci_dev *provider, struct pci_dev *client,

>  		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>  	}

>  done:

> +	if (!check_10bit_tags_vaild(client, provider, verbose) ||

> +	    !check_10bit_tags_vaild(provider, client, verbose))

> +		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

> +

>  	rcu_read_lock();

>  	p2pdma = rcu_dereference(provider->p2pdma);

>  	if (p2pdma)

> -- 

> 2.7.4

>
Dongdong Liu Aug. 7, 2021, 7:11 a.m. UTC | #3
On 2021/8/6 2:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 09:47:08PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:

>> Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with

>> 10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not

>> support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should

>> emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to

>> disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.

>> "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable

>> 10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.

>

> s/10-BIT/10-Bit/ several times.

Will fix.
>

> Add blank lines between paragraphs.

Will fix.
>

>> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>

>> ---

>>  drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>>  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)

>>

>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>> index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644

>> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@

>>  #include <linux/random.h>

>>  #include <linux/seq_buf.h>

>>  #include <linux/xarray.h>

>> +#include "pci.h"

>>

>>  enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {

>>  	PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,

>> @@ -410,6 +411,41 @@ static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)

>>  		(client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;

>>  }

>>

>> +static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,

>

> s/vaild/valid/

>

> Or maybe s/valid/safe/ or s/valid/supported/, since "valid" isn't

> quite the right word here.  We want to know whether the source is

> enabled to generate 10-bit tags, and if so, whether the destination

> can handle them.

>

> "if (check_10bit_tags_valid())" does not make sense because

> "check_10bit_tags_valid()" is not a question with a yes/no answer.

>

> "10bit_tags_valid()" *might* be, because "if (10bit_tags_valid())"

> makes sense.  But I don't think you can start with a digit.

>

> Or maybe you want to invert the sense, e.g.,

> "10bit_tags_unsupported()", since that avoids negation at the caller:

>

>   if (10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||

>       10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))

>         map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

Good suggestion. add a pci_ prefix.

if (pci_10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||
     pci_10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))
	map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

> Doesn't this patch need to be at the very beginning, before you start

> enabling 10-bit tags?  Otherwise there's a hole in the middle where we

> enable them and P2P DMA might break.

Yes, will do.
>

>> +				   bool verbose)

>> +{

>> +	bool req;

>> +	bool comp;

>> +	u16 ctl2;

>> +

>> +	if (a->is_virtfn) {

>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV

>> +		req = !!(a->physfn->sriov->ctrl &

>> +			 PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VF_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);

>> +#endif

>> +	} else {

>> +		pcie_capability_read_word(a, PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2, &ctl2);

>> +		req = !!(ctl2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);

>> +	}

>> +

>> +	comp = !!(b->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_COMP);

>> +	if (req && (!comp)) {

>> +		if (verbose) {

>> +			pci_warn(a, "cannot be used for peer-to-peer DMA as 10-Bit Tag Requester enable is set in device (%s), but peer device (%s) does not support the 10-Bit Tag Completer\n",

>> +				 pci_name(a), pci_name(b));

>

> No point in printing pci_name(a) twice.  pci_warn() prints it already;

> that should be enough.

Will fix.
>

> I think you can simplify this a little, e.g.,

>

>   if (!req)           /* 10-bit tags not enabled on requester */

>     return true;

>

>   if (comp)           /* completer can handle anything */

>     return true;

>

>   /* error case */

>   if (!verbose)

>     return false;

>

>   pci_warn(...);

>   return false;


Good point, this will make code more clean and readable.

Thanks,
Dongdong
>

>> +			if (a->is_virtfn)

>> +				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl\n",

>> +					 pci_name(a));

>> +			else

>> +				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/10bit_tag\n",

>> +					 pci_name(a));

>> +		}

>> +		return false;

>> +	}

>> +

>> +	return true;

>> +}

>> +

>>  /*

>>   * Calculate the P2PDMA mapping type and distance between two PCI devices.

>>   *

>> @@ -532,6 +568,10 @@ calc_map_type_and_dist(struct pci_dev *provider, struct pci_dev *client,

>>  		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>>  	}

>>  done:

>> +	if (!check_10bit_tags_vaild(client, provider, verbose) ||

>> +	    !check_10bit_tags_vaild(provider, client, verbose))

>> +		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>> +

>>  	rcu_read_lock();

>>  	p2pdma = rcu_dereference(provider->p2pdma);

>>  	if (p2pdma)

>> --

>> 2.7.4

>>

> .

>
Bjorn Helgaas Aug. 9, 2021, 5:31 p.m. UTC | #4
On Sat, Aug 07, 2021 at 03:11:34PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:
> 

> On 2021/8/6 2:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 09:47:08PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:

> > > Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with

> > > 10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not

> > > support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should

> > > emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to

> > > disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.

> > > "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable

> > > 10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.

> > 

> > s/10-BIT/10-Bit/ several times.

> Will fix.

> > 

> > Add blank lines between paragraphs.

> Will fix.

> > 

> > > Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>

> > > ---

> > >  drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

> > >  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)

> > > 

> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

> > > index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644

> > > --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

> > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@

> > >  #include <linux/random.h>

> > >  #include <linux/seq_buf.h>

> > >  #include <linux/xarray.h>

> > > +#include "pci.h"

> > > 

> > >  enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {

> > >  	PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,

> > > @@ -410,6 +411,41 @@ static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)

> > >  		(client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;

> > >  }

> > > 

> > > +static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,

> > 

> > s/vaild/valid/

> > 

> > Or maybe s/valid/safe/ or s/valid/supported/, since "valid" isn't

> > quite the right word here.  We want to know whether the source is

> > enabled to generate 10-bit tags, and if so, whether the destination

> > can handle them.

> > 

> > "if (check_10bit_tags_valid())" does not make sense because

> > "check_10bit_tags_valid()" is not a question with a yes/no answer.

> > 

> > "10bit_tags_valid()" *might* be, because "if (10bit_tags_valid())"

> > makes sense.  But I don't think you can start with a digit.

> > 

> > Or maybe you want to invert the sense, e.g.,

> > "10bit_tags_unsupported()", since that avoids negation at the caller:

> > 

> >   if (10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||

> >       10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))

> >         map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

> Good suggestion. add a pci_ prefix.

> 

> if (pci_10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||

>     pci_10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))

> 	map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;


This treats both directions as equally important.  I don't know P2PDMA
very well, but that doesn't seem like it would necessarily be the
case.  I would think a common case would be device A doing DMA to B,
but B *not* doing DMA to A.  So can you tell which direction you're
setting up here, and can you take advantage of any asymmetry, e.g., by
enabling 10-bit tags in the direction that supports it even if the
other direction does not?
Dongdong Liu Aug. 10, 2021, 12:31 p.m. UTC | #5
On 2021/8/10 1:31, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 07, 2021 at 03:11:34PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:

>>

>> On 2021/8/6 2:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

>>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 09:47:08PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:

>>>> Add a 10-Bit Tag check in the P2PDMA code to ensure that a device with

>>>> 10-Bit Tag Requester doesn't interact with a device that does not

>>>> support 10-BIT Tag Completer. Before that happens, the kernel should

>>>> emit a warning. "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../10bit_tag" to

>>>> disable 10-BIT Tag Requester for PF device.

>>>> "echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/.../sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl" to disable

>>>> 10-BIT Tag Requester for VF device.

>>>

>>> s/10-BIT/10-Bit/ several times.

>> Will fix.

>>>

>>> Add blank lines between paragraphs.

>> Will fix.

>>>

>>>> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>

>>>> ---

>>>>  drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>>>>  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)

>>>>

>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>>>> index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644

>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c

>>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@

>>>>  #include <linux/random.h>

>>>>  #include <linux/seq_buf.h>

>>>>  #include <linux/xarray.h>

>>>> +#include "pci.h"

>>>>

>>>>  enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {

>>>>  	PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,

>>>> @@ -410,6 +411,41 @@ static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)

>>>>  		(client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;

>>>>  }

>>>>

>>>> +static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,

>>>

>>> s/vaild/valid/

>>>

>>> Or maybe s/valid/safe/ or s/valid/supported/, since "valid" isn't

>>> quite the right word here.  We want to know whether the source is

>>> enabled to generate 10-bit tags, and if so, whether the destination

>>> can handle them.

>>>

>>> "if (check_10bit_tags_valid())" does not make sense because

>>> "check_10bit_tags_valid()" is not a question with a yes/no answer.

>>>

>>> "10bit_tags_valid()" *might* be, because "if (10bit_tags_valid())"

>>> makes sense.  But I don't think you can start with a digit.

>>>

>>> Or maybe you want to invert the sense, e.g.,

>>> "10bit_tags_unsupported()", since that avoids negation at the caller:

>>>

>>>   if (10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||

>>>       10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))

>>>         map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>> Good suggestion. add a pci_ prefix.

>>

>> if (pci_10bit_tags_unsupported(a, b) ||

>>     pci_10bit_tags_unsupported(b, a))

>> 	map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

>

> This treats both directions as equally important.  I don't know P2PDMA

> very well, but that doesn't seem like it would necessarily be the

> case.  I would think a common case would be device A doing DMA to B,

> but B *not* doing DMA to A.  So can you tell which direction you're

> setting up here, and can you take advantage of any asymmetry, e.g., by

> enabling 10-bit tags in the direction that supports it even if the

> other direction does not?


Documentation/driver-api/pci/p2pdma.rst
* Provider - A driver which provides or publishes P2P resources like
   memory or doorbell registers to other drivers.
* Client - A driver which makes use of a resource by setting up a
   DMA transaction to or from it.

So we may just check as below.
if (10bit_tags_unsupported(client, provider, verbose)
	map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;

@Logan What's your opinion?

Thanks,
Dongdong
> .

>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
index 50cdde3..948f2be 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/random.h>
 #include <linux/seq_buf.h>
 #include <linux/xarray.h>
+#include "pci.h"
 
 enum pci_p2pdma_map_type {
 	PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_UNKNOWN = 0,
@@ -410,6 +411,41 @@  static unsigned long map_types_idx(struct pci_dev *client)
 		(client->bus->number << 8) | client->devfn;
 }
 
+static bool check_10bit_tags_vaild(struct pci_dev *a, struct pci_dev *b,
+				   bool verbose)
+{
+	bool req;
+	bool comp;
+	u16 ctl2;
+
+	if (a->is_virtfn) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV
+		req = !!(a->physfn->sriov->ctrl &
+			 PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VF_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);
+#endif
+	} else {
+		pcie_capability_read_word(a, PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2, &ctl2);
+		req = !!(ctl2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);
+	}
+
+	comp = !!(b->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_COMP);
+	if (req && (!comp)) {
+		if (verbose) {
+			pci_warn(a, "cannot be used for peer-to-peer DMA as 10-Bit Tag Requester enable is set in device (%s), but peer device (%s) does not support the 10-Bit Tag Completer\n",
+				 pci_name(a), pci_name(b));
+			if (a->is_virtfn)
+				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/sriov_vf_10bit_tag_ctl\n",
+					 pci_name(a));
+			else
+				pci_warn(a, "to disable 10-Bit Tag Requester for this device, echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/%s/10bit_tag\n",
+					 pci_name(a));
+		}
+		return false;
+	}
+
+	return true;
+}
+
 /*
  * Calculate the P2PDMA mapping type and distance between two PCI devices.
  *
@@ -532,6 +568,10 @@  calc_map_type_and_dist(struct pci_dev *provider, struct pci_dev *client,
 		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;
 	}
 done:
+	if (!check_10bit_tags_vaild(client, provider, verbose) ||
+	    !check_10bit_tags_vaild(provider, client, verbose))
+		map_type = PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED;
+
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	p2pdma = rcu_dereference(provider->p2pdma);
 	if (p2pdma)