[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200805225330.GL19097@mellanox.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 19:53:30 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To: "Dey, Megha" <megha.dey@...el.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "Lu, Baolu" <baolu.lu@...el.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
"Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Lin, Jing" <jing.lin@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"kwankhede@...dia.com" <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"netanelg@...lanox.com" <netanelg@...lanox.com>,
"shahafs@...lanox.com" <shahafs@...lanox.com>,
"yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com" <yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Ortiz, Samuel" <samuel.ortiz@...el.com>,
"Hossain, Mona" <mona.hossain@...el.com>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 02/18] irq/dev-msi: Add support for a new DEV_MSI
irq domain
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:36:23PM +0000, Dey, Megha wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 3:16 PM
> > To: Dey, Megha <megha.dey@...el.com>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>; Jiang, Dave <dave.jiang@...el.com>;
> > vkoul@...nel.org; bhelgaas@...gle.com; rafael@...nel.org;
> > gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; tglx@...utronix.de; hpa@...or.com;
> > alex.williamson@...hat.com; Pan, Jacob jun <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>; Raj,
> > Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>; Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>; Lu, Baolu
> > <baolu.lu@...el.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@...el.com>; Kumar, Sanjay K
> > <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>; Luck, Tony <tony.luck@...el.com>; Lin, Jing
> > <jing.lin@...el.com>; Williams, Dan J <dan.j.williams@...el.com>;
> > kwankhede@...dia.com; eric.auger@...hat.com; parav@...lanox.com;
> > Hansen, Dave <dave.hansen@...el.com>; netanelg@...lanox.com;
> > shahafs@...lanox.com; yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com; pbonzini@...hat.com;
> > Ortiz, Samuel <samuel.ortiz@...el.com>; Hossain, Mona
> > <mona.hossain@...el.com>; dmaengine@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> > kernel@...r.kernel.org; x86@...nel.org; linux-pci@...r.kernel.org;
> > kvm@...r.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 02/18] irq/dev-msi: Add support for a new DEV_MSI
> > irq domain
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 07:18:39PM +0000, Dey, Megha wrote:
> >
> > > Hence we will only have one create_dev_msi_domain which can be called
> > > by any device driver that wants to use the dev-msi IRQ domain to
> > > alloc/free IRQs. It would be the responsibility of the device driver
> > > to provide the correct device and update the dev->msi_domain.
> >
> > I'm not sure that sounds like a good idea, why should a device driver touch dev-
> > >msi_domain?
> >
> > There was a certain appeal to the api I suggested by having everything related to
> > setting up the new IRQs being in the core code.
>
> The basic API to create the dev_msi domain would be :
>
> struct irq_domain *create_dev_msi_irq_domain(struct irq_domain *parent)
>
> This can be called by devices according to their use case.
>
> For e.g. in dsa case, it is called from the irq remapping driver:
> iommu->ir_dev_msi_domain = create_dev_msi_domain(iommu->ir_domain)
>
> and from the dsa mdev driver:
> p_dev = get_parent_pci_dev(dev);
> iommu = device_to_iommu(p_dev);
>
> dev->msi_domain = iommu->ir_dev_msi_domain;
>
> So we are creating the domain in the IRQ remapping domain which can be used by other devices which want to have the same IRQ parent domain and use dev-msi APIs. We are only updating that device's msi_domain to the already created dev-msi domain in the driver.
>
> Other devices (your rdma driver etc) can create their own dev-msi domain by passing the appropriate parent IRq domain.
>
> We cannot have this in the core code since the parent domain cannot
> be the same?
Well, I had suggested to pass in the parent struct device, but it
could certainly use an irq_domain instead:
platform_msi_assign_domain(dev, device_to_iommu(p_dev)->ir_domain);
Or
platform_msi_assign_domain(dev, pdev->msi_domain)
?
Any maybe the natural expression is to add a version of
platform_msi_create_device_domain() that accepts a parent irq_domain()
and if the device doesn't already have a msi_domain then it creates
one. Might be too tricky to manage lifetime of the new irq_domain
though..
It feels cleaner to me if everything related to this is contained in
the platform_msi and the driver using it. Not sure it makes sense to
involve the iommu?
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists