linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] iommu/vt-d: Implement device

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:41:56 -0700
From:   Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        "Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi@...el.com>,
        "Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.com>,
        jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] iommu/vt-d: Implement device_pasid domain attach
 ops

Hi Kevin,

On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 05:33:38 +0000, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
wrote:

> > From: Jacob Pan
> > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2022 5:02 AM
> > 
> > Hi Kevin,
> > 
> > On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 07:41:34 +0000, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
> > wrote:
> >   
> > > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 10:33 PM
> > > >
> > > > 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.  
> > >  
> > Perhaps i mis-presented here, I am not using 2D array. It is an 1D
> > xarray for domain PASIDs only. Then I use the existing device list in
> > each domain, adding another xa to track per-device-domain PASIDs.  
> > > besides that it also doesn't work when we support per-device PASID
> > > allocation in the future. In that case merging device PASIDs together
> > > is conceptually wrong.
> > >  
> > Sorry, could you elaborate? If we do per-dev PASID allocation, we could
> > use the ioasid_set for each pdev, right?  
> 
> My point is simply about the comment above which says the domain
> will have PASID 0, 1, 2 when there is [devA, PASID0] and [devB, PASID0].
> You can maintain a single  PASID list only when it's globally allocated
> cross devices. otherwise this has to be a tuple including device and
> PASID.
> 
Got you, you are right we don't want to limit to globally allocated scheme.

Thanks,

Jacob