[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB52762D093310D12FE5E5C76D8C10A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 03:18:40 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
CC: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
"Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@...el.com>,
Michael Shavit <mshavit@...gle.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/5] iommu: Call helper function to get assigned pasid
value
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2023 12:37 AM
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 07:52:52AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > > The driver should rely on there being exactly one iommu_domain for SVA
> > > per mm so it can hang the mm_notifier off the iommu_domain
> >
> > I'm confused. Isn't this series trying to allow multiple domains per mm?
>
> It is doing both.
>
> The main objective is to allow de-duplicating the SVA domains in the
> core code. The driver should be able to assume one SVA domain per
> instance, or even one SVA domain per compatible instance. The driver
> should not do any de-duplication.
>
> But we can't just store a single iommu_domain in the mm_struct - we
> have the same problem as iommufd and we need to create more domains if
> the domains we already have are incompatible with the device.
>
> Arguably this should not happen, and in any sane configuration we
> should have only 1 type of IOMMU driver that needs only 1 SVA domain.
>
> But right now things like SMMUv3 have problems crossing domains across
> instances, so we could have one SVA domain per IOMMU instance until
> that is fixed.
>
Thanks for the explanation. Tina, please include this information in your
next version so others can easily understand the motivation of introducing
multiple sva domains per mm.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists