[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230306110443.4ca52204@jacob-builder>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 11:04:43 -0800
From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
"David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi@...el.com>,
jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] iommu/vt-d: Implement set device pasid op for
default domain
Hi Kevin,
On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 05:35:58 +0000, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
wrote:
> > From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> > Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 12:38 PM
> >
> > On 3/3/23 11:02 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > >> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> > >> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 10:49 AM
> > >>
> > >> On 3/3/23 10:36 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > >>>> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> > >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 10:07 PM
> > >>>>> +
> > >>>>> + if (!sm_supported(iommu) || !info)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> @info has been referenced. !info check makes no sense.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Add pasid_supported(iommu).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Do you need to check whether the domain is compatible for this rid
> > >>>> pasid?
> > >>>
> > >>> what kind of compatibility is concerned here? In concept a pasid
> > >>> can be attached to any domain if it has been successfully attached
> > >>> to rid. Probably we can add a check here that RID2PASID must
> > >>> point to the domain already.
> > >>
> > >> "...if it has been successfully attached to rid..."
> > >>
> > >> We should not have this assumption in iommu driver's callback. The
> > iommu
> > >> driver has no (and should not have) knowledge about the history of
> > >> any domain.
> > >
> > > but this is an op for default domain which must have been attached
> > > to RID2PASID and any compatibility check between this domain and
> > > device should be passed.
> >
> > This is an op for DMA, DMA-FQ and UNMANAGED domain. The IOMMU
> > driver
> > doesn't need to interpret the default domain concept. :-)
> >
>
> yes if we target a general callback for all those domain types.
>
> and probably this is the right thing to do as in the end DMA type will
> be removed with Jason's cleanup
so, let me recap. set_dev_pasid() should make no assumptions of
ordering, i.e. it is equal to iommu_domain_ops.attach_dev().
It will be kind of the same as Baolu's old patch
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20220614034411.1634238-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com/
Thanks,
Jacob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists