lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 27 Sep 2023 12:44:24 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, joro@...tes.org,
        alex.williamson@...hat.com, kevin.tian@...el.com,
        robin.murphy@....com, cohuck@...hat.com, eric.auger@...hat.com,
        nicolinc@...dia.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com,
        chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com, yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com,
        peterx@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
        shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com, lulu@...hat.com,
        suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        zhenzhong.duan@...el.com, joao.m.martins@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/8] iommufd: Support attach/replace hwpt per pasid

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:49:29AM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
> On 9/26/23 5:26 PM, Yi Liu wrote:
> > From: Kevin Tian<kevin.tian@...el.com>
> > 
> > This introduces three APIs for device drivers to manage pasid attach/
> > replace/detach.
> > 
> >      int iommufd_device_pasid_attach(struct iommufd_device *idev,
> > 				    u32 pasid, u32 *pt_id);
> >      int iommufd_device_pasid_replace(struct iommufd_device *idev,
> > 				     u32 pasid, u32 *pt_id);
> >      void iommufd_device_pasid_detach(struct iommufd_device *idev,
> > 				     u32 pasid);
> 
> I am a bit puzzled. Do we really need both attach and replace interfaces
> to install a hwpt onto a pasid on device? The IOMMUFD already tracks the
> connections between hwpt and {device, pasid}, so it could easily call
> the right iommu interfaces (attach vs. replace). Perhaps I overlooked
> previous discussion on this.

It was a decision that attach will fail if something is already
attached..

But for this API we could go the way of the iommu code and have only
'set' and 'unset' as the two operations.

Jason

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ