[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230428085645.0310c4ca@jacob-builder>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 08:56:45 -0700
From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
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>,
"Ranganathan, Narayan" <narayan.ranganathan@...el.com>,
jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] iommu/sva: Explicitly exclude RID_PASID from SVA
Hi Kevin,
On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:40:12 +0000, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
wrote:
> > From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
> > Sent: Friday, April 28, 2023 1:50 AM
> >
> > SVA PASID allocation is hardcoded to start from 1 because 0 is used for
> > RID_PASID, let's make it explicit to avoid the potential conflicts.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c
> > index c434b95dc8eb..ac7c93bacb5c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c
> > @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ struct iommu_sva *iommu_sva_bind_device(struct
> > device *dev, struct mm_struct *mm
> > return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> >
> > /* Allocate mm->pasid if necessary. */
> > - ret = iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(mm, 1, max_pasids - 1);
> > + ret = iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(mm, IOMMU_DEF_RID_PASID + 1,
> > max_pasids - 1);
>
> To be future proof it's probably cleaner to define a
> IOMMU_MAX_RSVD_PASID in case there may be more reserved
> pasids in future usages?
much better, will do.
Thanks,
Jacob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists