linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/18] Add VFIO mediated device support and DEV-MSI support for the idxd driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200917172733.GU3699@nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:27:33 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
CC:     <vkoul@...nel.org>, <megha.dey@...el.com>, <maz@...nel.org>,
        <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
        <ashok.raj@...el.com>, <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, <baolu.lu@...el.com>,
        <kevin.tian@...el.com>, <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
        <tony.luck@...el.com>, <jing.lin@...el.com>,
        <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
        <eric.auger@...hat.com>, <parav@...lanox.com>, <rafael@...nel.org>,
        <netanelg@...lanox.com>, <shahafs@...lanox.com>,
        <yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com>, <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        <samuel.ortiz@...el.com>, <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 v3 00/18] Add VFIO mediated device support and DEV-MSI
 support for the idxd driver

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:15:24AM -0700, Dave Jiang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/17/2020 8:06 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 04:27:35PM -0700, Dave Jiang wrote:
> > >   drivers/dma/idxd/idxd.h                            |   65 +
> > >   drivers/dma/idxd/init.c                            |  100 ++
> > >   drivers/dma/idxd/irq.c                             |    6
> > >   drivers/dma/idxd/mdev.c                            | 1089 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   drivers/dma/idxd/mdev.h                            |  118 ++
> > 
> > It is common that drivers of a subsystem will be under that
> > subsystem's directory tree. This allows the subsystem community to
> > manage pages related to their subsystem and it's drivers.
> > 
> > Should the mdev parts be moved there?
> 
> I personally don't have a preference. I'll defer to Alex or Kirti to provide
> that guidance. It may make certains things like dealing with dma fault
> regions and etc easier using vfio calls from vfio_pci_private.h later on for
> vSVM support. It also may be the better code review and maintenance domain
> and alleviate Vinod having to deal with that portion since it's not
> dmaengine domain.

That is the general reason, yes. Asking the dmaengine maintainer to
review mdev just means it won't be reviewed properly.

This mistake has been made before and I view it as a lesson from the
ARM SOC disaggregation.

Jason