From: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
To: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
corbet@lwn.net, joro@8bytes.org, will@kernel.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, jackmanb@google.com,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, ziy@nvidia.com, david@redhat.com,
lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
rppt@kernel.org, xiaqinxin@huawei.com, baolu.lu@linux.intel.com,
rdunlap@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] iommu: debug-pagealloc: Track IOMMU pages
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:06:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aV-PvBqQ0Ktiha8e@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aV56BWisUQTMK2Gk@google.com>
On Wed, Jan 07, 2026 at 03:21:41PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 04:21:59PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
> > Using the new calls, use an atomic refcount to track how many times
> > a page is mapped in any of the IOMMUs.
> >
> > For unmap we need to use iova_to_phys() to get the physical address
> > of the pages.
> >
> > We use the smallest supported page size as the granularity of tracking
> > per domain.
> > This is important as it is possible to map pages and unmap them with
> > larger sizes (as in map_sg()) cases.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c
> > index 1d343421da98..86ccb310a4a8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c
> > @@ -29,19 +29,110 @@ struct page_ext_operations page_iommu_debug_ops = {
> > .need = need_iommu_debug,
> > };
> >
> > +static struct page_ext *get_iommu_page_ext(phys_addr_t phys)
> > +{
> > + struct page *page = phys_to_page(phys);
> > + struct page_ext *page_ext = page_ext_get(page);
> > +
> > + return page_ext;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct iommu_debug_metadata *get_iommu_data(struct page_ext *page_ext)
> > +{
> > + return page_ext_data(page_ext, &page_iommu_debug_ops);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void iommu_debug_inc_page(phys_addr_t phys)
> > +{
> > + struct page_ext *page_ext = get_iommu_page_ext(phys);
> > + struct iommu_debug_metadata *d = get_iommu_data(page_ext);
> > +
> > + WARN_ON(atomic_inc_return_relaxed(&d->ref) <= 0);
> > + page_ext_put(page_ext);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void iommu_debug_dec_page(phys_addr_t phys)
> > +{
> > + struct page_ext *page_ext = get_iommu_page_ext(phys);
> > + struct iommu_debug_metadata *d = get_iommu_data(page_ext);
> > +
> > + WARN_ON(atomic_dec_return_relaxed(&d->ref) < 0);
> > + page_ext_put(page_ext);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * IOMMU page size doesn't have to match the CPU page size. So, we use
> > + * the smallest IOMMU page size to refcount the pages in the vmemmap.
> > + * That is important as both map and unmap has to use the same page size
> > + * to update the refcount to avoid double counting the same page.
> > + * And as we can't know from iommu_unmap() what was the original page size
> > + * used for map, we just use the minimum supported one for both.
> > + */
> > +static size_t iommu_debug_page_size(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> > +{
> > + return 1UL << __ffs(domain->pgsize_bitmap);
> > +}
> > +
> > void __iommu_debug_map(struct iommu_domain *domain, phys_addr_t phys, size_t size)
> > {
> > + size_t off, end;
> > + size_t page_size = iommu_debug_page_size(domain);
> > +
> > + if (WARN_ON(!phys || check_add_overflow(phys, size, &end)))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + for (off = 0 ; off < size ; off += page_size) {
> > + if (!pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys + off)))
> > + continue;
> > + iommu_debug_inc_page(phys + off);
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void __iommu_debug_update_iova(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> > + unsigned long iova, size_t size, bool inc)
> > +{
> > + size_t off, end;
> > + size_t page_size = iommu_debug_page_size(domain);
> > +
> > + if (WARN_ON(check_add_overflow(iova, size, &end)))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + for (off = 0 ; off < size ; off += page_size) {
> > + phys_addr_t phys = iommu_iova_to_phys(domain, iova + off);
> > +
> > + if (!phys || !pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys)))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + if (inc)
> > + iommu_debug_inc_page(phys);
> > + else
> > + iommu_debug_dec_page(phys);
> > + }
>
> This might loop for too long when we're unmapping a big buffer (say 1GB)
> which is backed by multiple 4K mappings (i.e. not mapped using large
> mappings) it may hold the CPU for too long, per the above example:
>
> 1,073,741,824 / 4096 = 262,144 iterations each with an iova_to_phys walk
> in a tight loop, could hold the CPU for a little too long and could
> potentially result in soft lockups (painful to see in a debug kernel).
> Since, iommu_unmap can be called in atomic contexts (i.e. interrupts,
> spinlocks with pre-emption disabled) we cannot simply add cond_resched()
> here as well.
>
> Maybe we can cross that bridge once we get there, but if we can't solve
> the latency now, it'd be nice to explicitly document this risk
> (potential soft lockups on large unmaps) in the Kconfig or cmdline help text?
>
Yes, I am not sure how bad that would be, looking at the code, the closest
pattern I see in that path is for SWIOTLB, when it’s enabled it will do a
lot of per-page operations on unmap.
There is a disclaimer already in dmesg and the Kconfig about the performance
overhead, and you would need to enable a config + cmdline to get this, so
I’d expect someone enabling it to have some expectations of what they are
doing. But I can add more info to Kconfig if that makes sense.
> > }
> >
> > void __iommu_debug_unmap_begin(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> > unsigned long iova, size_t size)
> > {
> > + __iommu_debug_update_iova(domain, iova, size, false);
> > }
> >
> > void __iommu_debug_unmap_end(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> > unsigned long iova, size_t size,
> > size_t unmapped)
> > {
> > + if (unmapped == size)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If unmap failed, re-increment the refcount, but if it unmapped
> > + * larger size, decrement the extra part.
> > + */
> > + if (unmapped < size)
> > + __iommu_debug_update_iova(domain, iova + unmapped,
> > + size - unmapped, true);
> > + else
> > + __iommu_debug_update_iova(domain, iova + size,
> > + unmapped - size, false);
> > }
>
> I'm a little concerned about this part, when we unmap more than requested,
> the __iommu_debug_update_iova relies on
> iommu_iova_to_phys(domain, iova + off) to find the physical page to
> decrement. However, since __iommu_debug_unmap_end is called *after* the
> IOMMU driver has removed the mapping (in __iommu_unmap). Thus, the
> iommu_iova_to_phys return 0 (fail) causing the loop in update_iova:
> `if (!phys ...)` to silently continue.
>
> Since the refcounts for the physical pages in the range:
> [iova + size, iova + unmapped] are never decremented. Won't this result
> in false positives (warnings about page leaks) when those pages are
> eventually freed?
>
> For example:
>
> - A driver maps a 2MB region (512 x 4KB). All 512 pgs have refcount = 1.
>
> - A driver / IOMMU-client calls iommu_unmap(iova, 4KB)
>
> - unmap_begin(4KB) calls iova_to_phys, succeeds, and decrements the
> refcount for the 1st page to 0.
>
> - __iommu_unmap calls the IOMMU driver. The driver (unable to split the
> block) zaps the entire 2MB range and returns unmapped = 2MB.
>
> - unmap_end(size=4KB, unmapped=2MB) sees that more was unmapped than
> requested & attempts to decrement refcounts for the remaining 511 pgs
>
> - __iommu_debug_update_iova is called for the remaining range, which
> ends up calling iommu_iova_to_phys. Since the mapping was destroyed,
> iova_to_phys returns 0.
>
> - The loop skips the decrement causing the remaining 511 pages to leak
> with refcount = 1.
>
Agh, yes, iova_to_phys will always return zero, so the
__iommu_debug_update_iova() will do nothing in that case.
I am not aware which drivers are doing this, I added this logic
because I saw the IOMMU core allow it. I vaguely remember that
had something about splitting blocks which might be related to VFIO,
but I don't think that is needed anymore.
I am happy just to drop it or even preemptively warn in that case, as
it is impossible to retrieve the old addresses.
And maybe, that's a chance to re-evaluate we allow this behviour.
Thanks,
Mostafa
> Thanks,
> Praan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-08 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-06 16:21 [PATCH v5 0/4] iommu: Add IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC sanitizer Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-06 16:21 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] iommu: Add page_ext for IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-06 18:50 ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2026-01-07 15:26 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-01-07 16:53 ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2026-01-08 10:42 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-08 11:53 ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2026-01-06 16:21 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] iommu: Add calls " Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-06 21:17 ` Samiullah Khawaja
2026-01-07 5:48 ` Baolu Lu
2026-01-07 15:28 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-01-06 16:21 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] iommu: debug-pagealloc: Track IOMMU pages Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-06 21:18 ` Samiullah Khawaja
2026-01-07 15:21 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-01-08 11:06 ` Mostafa Saleh [this message]
2026-01-08 11:33 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-09 3:28 ` Baolu Lu
2026-01-09 7:34 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-01-09 10:58 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-09 11:02 ` Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-06 16:22 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] iommu: debug-pagealloc: Check mapped/unmapped kernel memory Mostafa Saleh
2026-01-06 21:19 ` Samiullah Khawaja
2026-01-07 15:24 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] iommu: Add IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC sanitizer Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-01-08 11:37 ` Mostafa Saleh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aV-PvBqQ0Ktiha8e@google.com \
--to=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xiaqinxin@huawei.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox