Re: [Xen-devel] [BUG] After upgrade to Xen 4.12.0 iommu=no-igfx

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 06.08.2019 23:48, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 9:18 AM Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 10:05:40AM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 11:25:04AM -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > > > This patch completely fixes the problem for me!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Roger! I'd love to see this in Xen 4.13
> > > Thanks for testing!
> > >
> > > It's still not clear to me why the previous approach didn't work, but
> > > I think this patch is better because it removes the usage of
> > > {set/clear}_identity_p2m_entry from PV domains. I will submit this
> > > formally now.
> > Sorry to bother again, but since we still don't understand why the
> > previous fix didn't work for you, and I can't reproduce this with my
> > hardware, could you give the attached patch a try?
> No worries -- and thanks for helping to get it over the finish line --
> this is much appreciated!
>
> I'm happy to say that this latest patch is also working just fine. So
> I guess this is the one that's going to land in Xen 4.13?
Not necessarily - the other patch is also a candidate, but its
description would need to explain what was actually wrong.

> > AFAICT the only difference between the non-working version and the
> > working version is the flush, so I've added it here.
Now I'm afraid I still can't draw a helpful conclusion from Roman's
successful test: intel_iommu_hwdom_init(), after having called
setup_hwdom_rmrr(), calls iommu_flush_all() (with one other,
seemingly innocent call in between). The only conclusion I _could_
draw is that iommu_flush_all() doesn't do what its name says. Which
would be quite bad. But

[orig]
iommu_flush_all()
-> iommu_flush_iotlb_global(flush_non_present_entry=0)
-> flush->iotlb(DMA_TLB_GLOBAL_FLUSH, flush_non_present_entry=0)

[patch]
iommu_flush_iotlb_all()
-> iommu_flush_iotlb(dma_old_pte_present=0, page_count=0)
-> iommu_flush_iotlb_dsi(flush_non_present_entry=0)
-> flush->iotlb(DMA_TLB_DSI_FLUSH, flush_non_present_entry=0)

suggests to me that (as one would infer from the names) is the
more through flush. I must be overlooking something ...

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel