[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB5276130A632EABC6C771C32E8C77A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 07:34:33 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
CC: "jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>, "joro@...tes.org"
<joro@...tes.org>, "ddutile@...hat.com" <ddutile@...hat.com>, "Liu, Yi L"
<yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"jsnitsel@...hat.com" <jsnitsel@...hat.com>, "praan@...gle.com"
<praan@...gle.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "iommu@...ts.linux.dev"
<iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "patches@...ts.linux.dev"
<patches@...ts.linux.dev>, "baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com"
<baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 06/12] iommufd/selftest: Implement mock_get_viommu_size
and mock_viommu_init
> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2025 1:12 AM
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 08:17:19AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2025 1:13 AM
> > >
> > > Sanitize the inputs and report the size of struct mock_viommu on success,
> > > in mock_get_viommu_size().
> > >
> > > The core will ensure the viommu_type is set to the core vIOMMU object,
> so
> > > simply init the driver part in mock_viommu_init().
> > >
> > > The mock_viommu_alloc() will be cleaned up once the transition is done.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>
> >
> > btw I didn't see where mock_viommu->s2_parent is set in the original
> > code. Is it a bug or oversight?
>
> Looks like that was missing.. But it shouldn't trigger any bug
> since mock_nested->parent doesn't have any meaningful value in
> the code..
>
> Perhaps we should think of adding some use case out of it. Or,
> we'd need to clean it away..
>
Then it's kind of dead code. If we cannot find meaningful use then
better to remove it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists