[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf793119-591f-19b5-b708-45c6f3eadc79@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 11:43:55 +0800
From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] iommu: Use fault cookie to store iopf_param
On 2023/7/13 11:24, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 11:13 AM
>>
>> On 2023/7/12 6:02, Jacob Pan wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 09:06:42 +0800, Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ int iommu_queue_iopf(struct iommu_fault *fault,
>>>> struct device *dev)
>>>> * As long as we're holding param->lock, the queue can't be
>>>> unlinked
>>>> * from the device and therefore cannot disappear.
>>>> */
>>>> - iopf_param = param->iopf_param;
>>>> + iopf_param = iommu_get_device_fault_cookie(dev, 0);
>>> I am not sure I understand how does it know the cookie type is iopf_param
>>> for PASID 0?
>>>
>>> Between IOPF and IOMMUFD use of the cookie, cookie types are different,
>>> right?
>>>
>>
>> The fault cookie is managed by the code that delivers or handles the
>> faults. The sva and IOMMUFD paths are exclusive.
>>
>
> what about siov? A siov-capable device can support sva and iommufd
> simultaneously.
For siov case, the pasid should be global. RID and each pasid are still
exclusive, so I don't see any problem. Did I overlook anything?
Best regards,
baolu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists