[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZMNHarPX7yA+VTdT@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 21:43:22 -0700
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
CC: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
"farman@...ux.ibm.com" <farman@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/4] iommufd: Add iommufd_access_replace() API
On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 03:45:39AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> > Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 3:04 AM
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 09:03:01AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 07:59:11PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just realized that either my v8 or your version calls unmap()
> > > > first at the entire cur_ioas. So, there seems to be no point in
> > > > doing that fallback re-add routine since the cur_ioas isn't the
> > > > same, which I don't feel quite right...
> > >
> > > The point is to restore the access back to how it should be on failure
> > > so future use of the accesss still does the right thing.
> > >
> > > We already have built into this a certain non-atomicity for mdevs,
> > > they can see a pin failure during replace if they race an access
> > > during this unmap window. This is similar to the real HW iommu's
> > > without atomic replace.
> >
> > I was concerned about, after the replace, mdev losing all the
> > mappings due to the unmap() call, which means the fallback is
> > not really a status quo. Do you mean that they could pin those
> > lost mappings back?
>
> None of mdev drivers does that.
>
> but we need think about the actual usage. I don't think the user
> can request ioas change w/o actually reconfiguring the mdev
> device. Presumably the latter could lead to reconstructure of pinned
> pages.
I can understand that the user should reconfigure the IOAS on
success. Yet, should we expect it to reconfigure on a failure
also?
Thanks!
Nic
Powered by blists - more mailing lists