mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-11-24 20:54:10 +08:00
iommu/vt-d: Set SRE bit only when hardware has SRS cap
SRS cap is the hardware cap telling if the hardware IOMMU can support
requests seeking supervisor privilege or not. SRE bit in scalable-mode
PASID table entry is treated as Reserved(0) for implementation not
supporting SRS cap.
Checking SRS cap before setting SRE bit can avoid the non-recoverable
fault of "Non-zero reserved field set in PASID Table Entry" caused by
setting SRE bit while there is no SRS cap support. The fault messages
look like below:
DMAR: DRHD: handling fault status reg 2
DMAR: [DMA Read NO_PASID] Request device [00:0d.0] fault addr 0x1154e1000
[fault reason 0x5a]
SM: Non-zero reserved field set in PASID Table Entry
Fixes: 6f7db75e1c
("iommu/vt-d: Add second level page table interface")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Tina Zhang <tina.zhang@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221115070346.1112273-1-tina.zhang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221116051544.26540-3-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
This commit is contained in:
parent
242b0aaeab
commit
7fc961cf7f
@ -642,7 +642,7 @@ int intel_pasid_setup_second_level(struct intel_iommu *iommu,
|
||||
* Since it is a second level only translation setup, we should
|
||||
* set SRE bit as well (addresses are expected to be GPAs).
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (pasid != PASID_RID2PASID)
|
||||
if (pasid != PASID_RID2PASID && ecap_srs(iommu->ecap))
|
||||
pasid_set_sre(pte);
|
||||
pasid_set_present(pte);
|
||||
spin_unlock(&iommu->lock);
|
||||
@ -685,7 +685,8 @@ int intel_pasid_setup_pass_through(struct intel_iommu *iommu,
|
||||
* We should set SRE bit as well since the addresses are expected
|
||||
* to be GPAs.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
pasid_set_sre(pte);
|
||||
if (ecap_srs(iommu->ecap))
|
||||
pasid_set_sre(pte);
|
||||
pasid_set_present(pte);
|
||||
spin_unlock(&iommu->lock);
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user