[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251117175427.GG10864@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 13:54:27 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Cc: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, robin.murphy@....com, will@...nel.org,
joro@...tes.org, kevin.tian@...el.com, jsnitsel@...hat.com,
vasant.hegde@....com, iommu@...ts.linux.dev, santosh.shukla@....com,
sairaj.arunkodilkar@....com, jon.grimm@....com,
prashanthpra@...gle.com, wvw@...gle.com, wnliu@...gle.com,
gptran@...gle.com, kpsingh@...gle.com, joao.m.martins@...cle.com,
alejandro.j.jimenez@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] iommu/amd: Introduce Nested Translation support
On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 01:52:02PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 06:24:52PM +0000, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > Note: This series is rebased on top of:
> > * Git repo: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/iommu/linux.git
> > Branch: next
> > Commit: 91920a9d87f5 ("Merge branches 'arm/smmu/updates', 'arm/smmu/bindings',
> > 'mediatek', 'nvidia/tegra', 'amd/amd-vi' and 'core'
> > into next")
> > * [PATCH v5] iommu/amd: Add support for hw_info for iommu capability query
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20250926141901.511313-1-suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com/T/#u
>
> Nit: this patch doesn't apply cleanly on 91920a9d87f5 :-/
>
> > drivers/iommu/amd/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/iommu/amd/amd_iommu.h | 36 ++++
> > drivers/iommu/amd/amd_iommu_types.h | 48 +++++-
> > drivers/iommu/amd/init.c | 8 +
> > drivers/iommu/amd/iommu.c | 221 +++++++++++++++---------
> > drivers/iommu/amd/iommufd.c | 50 ++++++
> > drivers/iommu/amd/iommufd.h | 5 +
> > drivers/iommu/amd/nested.c | 259 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/uapi/linux/iommufd.h | 11 ++
>
> So, this seems to be a preparatory series for AMD vIOMMU, yet it
> doesn't properly work since it's missing IOMMUFD_VIOMMU_TYPE_AMD
> and the invalidation component (HW_QUEUE).
>
> However, the series does declare IOMMU_HWPT_DATA_AMD_GUEST in the
> uAPI header. I am afraid that might confuse user who might think
> AMD now supports virtualization using the HWPT-based mode, like
> Intel VT-d.
>
> So, maybe we should either:
> - leave a note at IOMMU_HWPT_DATA_AMD_GUEST to declare it is
> incomplete yet, and remove later
> - keep IOMMU_HWPT_DATA_AMD_GUEST in an AMD driver header, and
> move to the uAPI header later
>
> Jason?
Yeah, I like to see this incremental work, but Alex recently raised
that we should be a bit more careful about how userspace perceives
these partially complete things.
I don't think tricks with head files work well, I think what you'd
want to do is leave some critical system call disabled until all the
work is finished so the VMM never has to see a half working
implementation?
The patch to get the info would have been a nice choice for this purpose..
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists