[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220512115101.GU49344@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 08:51:01 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/12] iommu: Add attach/detach_dev_pasid domain ops
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 08:00:59AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > It is not "missing" it is just renamed to blocking_domain->ops->set_dev_pasid()
> >
> > The implementation of that function would be identical to
> > detach_dev_pasid.
>
> attach(dev, pasid, sva_domain)
> detach(dev, pasid, sva_domain)
>
> versus
>
> set_dev_pasid(dev, pasid, sva_domain)
> set_dev_pasid(dev, pasid, blocking)
>
> we loose the information of the domain previously attached, and the SMMU
> driver has to retrieve it to find the ASID corresponding to the mm.
It would be easy to have the old domain be an input as well - the core
code knows it.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists