[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y9fcAdFxl7GVSH9r@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:02:25 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@...el.com, yi.l.liu@...el.com, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] iommufd: Add devices_users to track the
hw_pagetable usage by device
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 01:18:09PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> From: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
>
> Currently, hw_pagetable tracks the attached devices using a device list.
> When attaching the first device to the kernel-managed hw_pagetable, it
> should be linked to IOAS. When detaching the last device from this hwpt,
> the link with IOAS should be removed too. And this first-or-last device
> check is done with list_empty(hwpt->devices).
>
> However, with a nested configuration, when a device is attached to the
> user-managed stage-1 hw_pagetable, it will be added to this user-managed
> hwpt's device list instead of the kernel-managed stage-2 hwpt's one. And
> this breaks the logic for a kernel-managed hw_pagetable link/disconnect
> to/from IOAS/IOPT. e.g. the stage-2 hw_pagetable would be linked to IOAS
> multiple times if multiple device is attached, but it will become empty
> as soon as one device detached.
Why this seems really weird to say.
The stage 2 is linked explicitly to the IOAS that drives it's
map/unmap
Why is there any implicit activity here? There should be no implicit
attach of the S2 to an IOAS ever.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists