[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB527674C06FAF4DD211B342BB8C419@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 05:00:40 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
CC: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
"cohuck@...hat.com" <cohuck@...hat.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
"chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
"yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>,
"peterx@...hat.com" <peterx@...hat.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
"lulu@...hat.com" <lulu@...hat.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"Duan, Zhenzhong" <zhenzhong.duan@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/4] iommufd: Add IOMMU_DEVICE_GET_HW_INFO
> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2023 2:30 AM
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 08:42:07AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > > +};
> > > +#define IOMMU_DEVICE_GET_HW_INFO _IO(IOMMUFD_TYPE,
> > > IOMMUFD_CMD_DEVICE_GET_HW_INFO)
> > > #endif
> >
> > Here we have a naming confusion.
> >
> > 'IOMMU' is the prefix of iommufd ioctls.
> >
> > 'DEVICE' is the subjective.
> >
> > Then "GET_HW_INFO" implies getting hardware info related to
> > this device. then it should not be restricted to the iommu info.
> >
> > with that it's clearer to call it IOMMU_DEVICE_GET_IOMMU_INFO.
>
> Though the entire ioctl is tied to the input "dev_id", I think
> it isn't really about the device corresponding to the dev_id,
> similar to the IOMMU_HWPT_ALLOC having a dev_id input too. So,
> I think the "IOMMU_DEVICE" here should be interpreted simply
> as "an iommu device". We could also highlight this somewhere
> in the header.
yes this is a good view of it. with that it's not necessary to have
a 'DEVICE' notation in the name which looks confusing with dev_id.
Just IOMMU_GET_HW_INFO for the iommu behind the specified dev_id.
then keep the structure name as iommu_hw_info.
>
> With that being said, IOMMU_DEVICE_SET/UNSET_DATA should be
> renamed to IOMMU_DEVICE_SET/UNSET_DEV_DATA -- "DEVICE" is the
> iommu device while the "DEV_DATA" is a given device that's
> behind the iommu.
this then becomes IOMMU_SET/UNSET_DEV_DATA.
>
> > similarly for struct iommu_hw_info.
> >
> > 'iommu' is the prefix for all iommufd ioctl structures.
> >
> > then 'hw_info' is too broard.
> >
> > iommu_device_iommu_info reads better? though having two
> > iommu's in the name is a little bit annoying...
>
> How about:
> IOMMU_DEVICE_GET_FEATURES
> struct iommu_device_features
> ?
>
> Thanks
> Nic
Powered by blists - more mailing lists