[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230925134506.GB13733@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 10:45:06 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Cindy Lu <lulu@...hat.com>
Cc: jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com, yi.l.liu@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/7] vdpa: change the map/unmap process to support iommufd
On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 01:05:37AM +0800, Cindy Lu wrote:
> Add the check for iommufd_ictx,If vdpa don't have the iommufd_ictx
> then will use the Legacy iommu domain pathway
>
> Signed-off-by: Cindy Lu <lulu@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/vhost/vdpa.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> index 91da012084e9..8d1ad89d4671 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> @@ -981,6 +981,10 @@ static int vhost_vdpa_map(struct vhost_vdpa *v, struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb,
> } else if (ops->set_map) {
> if (!v->in_batch)
> r = ops->set_map(vdpa, asid, iotlb);
> + } else if (!vdpa->iommufd_ictx) {
> + /* Legacy iommu domain pathway without IOMMUFD */
> + r = iommu_map(v->domain, iova, pa, size,
> + perm_to_iommu_flags(perm));
> } else {
> r = iommu_map(v->domain, iova, pa, size,
> perm_to_iommu_flags(perm));
Um, why is the 2nd else the same as the new one?
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists