[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191031154247.GB28061@willie-the-truck>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 15:42:47 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Allow building as a module
Hi Joerg,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 08:31:48PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 02:51:10PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > By removing the redundant call to 'pci_request_acs()' we can allow the
> > ARM SMMUv3 driver to be built as a module.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/Kconfig b/drivers/iommu/Kconfig
> > index e3842eabcfdd..7583d47fc4d5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/Kconfig
> > @@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ config ARM_SMMU_DISABLE_BYPASS_BY_DEFAULT
> > config.
> >
> > config ARM_SMMU_V3
> > - bool "ARM Ltd. System MMU Version 3 (SMMUv3) Support"
> > + tristate "ARM Ltd. System MMU Version 3 (SMMUv3) Support"
> > depends on ARM64
> > select IOMMU_API
> > select IOMMU_IO_PGTABLE_LPAEa
>
> Sorry for the stupid question, but what prevents the iommu module from
> being unloaded when there are active users? There are no symbol
> dependencies to endpoint device drivers, because the interface is only
> exposed through the iommu-api, right? Is some sort of manual module
> reference counting needed?
Generally, I think unloading the IOMMU driver module while there are
active users is a pretty bad idea, much like unbinding the driver via
/sys in the same situation would also be fairly daft. However, I *think*
the code in __device_release_driver() tries to deal with this by
iterating over the active consumers and ->remove()ing them first.
I'm without hardware access at the moment, so I haven't been able to
test this myself. We could nobble the module_exit() hook, but there's
still the "force unload" option depending on the .config.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists