linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/1] iommu/vt-d: Add set_dev

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:   Tue, 14 Jun 2022 05:36:57 +0000
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To:     Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC:     "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 1/1] iommu/vt-d: Add set_dev_pasid callbacks for default
 domain

> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 12:48 PM
> 
> On 2022/6/14 12:02, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 11:44 AM
> >>
> >> This allows the upper layers to set a domain to a PASID of a device
> >> if the PASID feature is supported by the IOMMU hardware. The typical
> >> use cases are, for example, kernel DMA with PASID and hardware
> >> assisted mediated device drivers.
> >>
> >
> > why is it not part of the series for those use cases? There is no consumer
> > of added callbacks in this patch...
> 
> It could be. I just wanted to maintain the integrity of Intel IOMMU
> driver implementation.

but let's not add dead code. and this patch is actually a right step
simply from set_dev_pasid() p.o.v hence you should include in any
series which first tries to use that interface.

> 
> >
> >> +/* PCI domain-subdevice relationship */
> >> +struct subdev_domain_info {
> >> +	struct list_head link_domain;	/* link to domain siblings */
> >> +	struct device *dev;		/* physical device derived from */
> >> +	ioasid_t pasid;			/* PASID on physical device */
> >> +};
> >> +
> >
> > It's not subdev. Just dev+pasid in iommu's context.
> 
> How about struct device_pasid_info?
> 

this is better.