The guest pasid related callbacks are not called in the tree. Remove them
to avoid dead code.
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220216025249.3459465-2-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
This fixes improper iotlb invalidation in intel_pasid_tear_down_entry().
When a PASID was used as nested mode, released and reused, the following
error message will appear:
[ 180.187556] Unexpected page request in Privilege Mode
[ 180.187565] Unexpected page request in Privilege Mode
[ 180.279933] Unexpected page request in Privilege Mode
[ 180.279937] Unexpected page request in Privilege Mode
Per chapter 6.5.3.3 of VT-d spec 3.3, when tear down a pasid entry, the
software should use Domain selective IOTLB flush if the PGTT of the pasid
entry is SL only or Nested, while for the pasid entries whose PGTT is FL
only or PT using PASID-based IOTLB flush is enough.
Fixes: 2cd1311a26 ("iommu/vt-d: Add set domain DOMAIN_ATTR_NESTING attr")
Signed-off-by: Kumar Sanjay K <sanjay.k.kumar@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
Tested-by: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210817042425.1784279-1-yi.l.liu@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210817124321.1517985-3-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
The Intel VT-d driver checks wrong register to report snoop capablility
when using first level page table for GPA to HPA translation. This might
lead the IOMMU driver to say that it supports snooping control, but in
reality, it does not. Fix this by always setting PASID-table-entry.PGSNP
whenever a pasid entry is setting up for GPA to HPA translation so that
the IOMMU driver could report snoop capability as long as it runs in the
scalable mode.
Fixes: b802d070a5 ("iommu/vt-d: Use iova over first level")
Suggested-by: Rajesh Sankaran <rajesh.sankaran@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210330021145.13824-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
Some functions have been removed. Remove the remaining function
delarations.
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210323010600.678627-5-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
As per Intel vt-d spec, Rev 3.0 (section 10.4.45 "Virtual Command Response
Register"), the status code of "No PASID available" error in response to
the Allocate PASID command is 2, not 1. The same for "Invalid PASID" error
in response to the Free PASID command.
We will otherwise see confusing kernel log under the command failure from
guest side. Fix it.
Fixes: 24f27d32ab ("iommu/vt-d: Enlightened PASID allocation")
Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210227073909.432-1-yuzenghui@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
PASID is defined as a few different types in iommu including "int",
"u32", and "unsigned int". To be consistent and to match with uapi
definitions, define PASID and its variations (e.g. max PASID) as "u32".
"u32" is also shorter and a little more explicit than "unsigned int".
No PASID type change in uapi although it defines PASID as __u64 in
some places.
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1600187413-163670-2-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com
Lu Baolu