[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220315143322.GW11336@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 11:33:22 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] iommu/vt-d: Implement device_pasid domain attach
ops
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 10:07:07PM -0700, Jacob Pan wrote:
> + /*
> + * Each domain could have multiple devices attached with shared or per
> + * device PASIDs. At the domain level, we keep track of unique PASIDs and
> + * device user count.
> + * E.g. If a domain has two devices attached, device A has PASID 0, 1;
> + * device B has PASID 0, 2. Then the domain would have PASID 0, 1, 2.
> + */
A 2d array of xarray's seems like a poor data structure for this task.
AFACIT this wants to store a list of (device, pasid) tuples, so a
simple linked list, 1d xarray vector or a red black tree seems more
appropriate..
> + if (entry) {
> + pinfo = entry;
> + } else {
> + pinfo = kzalloc(sizeof(*pinfo), GFP_ATOMIC);
> + if (!pinfo)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + pinfo->pasid = pasid;
> + /* Store the new PASID info in the per domain array */
> + ret = xa_err(__xa_store(&dmar_domain->pasids, pasid, pinfo,
> + GFP_ATOMIC));
> + if (ret)
> + goto xa_store_err;
> + }
> + /* Store PASID in per device-domain array, this is for tracking devTLB */
> + ret = xa_err(xa_store(&info->pasids, pasid, pinfo, GFP_ATOMIC));
> + if (ret)
> + goto xa_store_err;
> +
> + atomic_inc(&pinfo->users);
> + xa_unlock(&dmar_domain->pasids);
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +xa_store_err:
> + xa_unlock(&dmar_domain->pasids);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&iommu->lock, flags);
> + intel_pasid_tear_down_entry(iommu, dev, pasid, false);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iommu->lock, flags);
> +
> + if (!atomic_read(&pinfo->users)) {
> + __xa_erase(&dmar_domain->pasids, pasid);
This isn't locked right
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists