[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240905160353.GP1358970@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 13:03:53 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@...el.com, will@...nel.org, joro@...tes.org,
suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, robin.murphy@....com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, shuah@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, eric.auger@...hat.com,
jean-philippe@...aro.org, mdf@...nel.org, mshavit@...gle.com,
shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com, smostafa@...gle.com,
yi.l.liu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/19] iommufd/viommu: Add
IOMMU_VIOMMU_SET/UNSET_VDEV_ID ioctl
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 09:59:43AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> Introduce a pair of new ioctls to set/unset a per-viommu virtual device id
> that should be linked to a physical device id via an idev pointer.
Given some of the other discussions around CC I suspect we should
rename these to 'create/destroy virtual device' with an eye that
eventually they would be extended like other ops with per-CC platform
data.
ie this would be the interface to tell the CC trusted world that a
secure device is being added to a VM with some additional flags..
Right now it only conveys the vRID parameter of the virtual device
being created.
A following question is if these objects should have their own IDs in
the iommufd space too, and then unset is not unset but just a normal
destroy object. If so then the thing you put in the ids xarray would
also just be a normal object struct.
This is probably worth doing if this is going to grow more CC stuff
later.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists