Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 Apr 2024 10:42:21 -0300 | From | Jason Gunthorpe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 01/12] iommu/vt-d: Add cache tag assignment interface |
| |
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 09:17:41PM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote: > On 2024/4/11 7:14, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2024 11:42 PM > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:16:54AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: > > > > +static int __cache_tag_assign_parent_domain(struct dmar_domain > > > *domain, u16 did, > > > > + struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid) > > > > +{ > > > > + struct device_domain_info *info = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev); > > > > + int ret; > > > > + > > > > + ret = cache_tag_assign(domain, did, dev, pasid, > > > CACHE_TAG_TYPE_PARENT_IOTLB); > > > > + if (ret || !info->ats_enabled) > > > > + return ret; > > > > > > I'm not sure I understood the point of PARENT_IOTLB? I didn't see any > > > different implementation? > > > > > > Isn't this backwards though? Each domain should have a list of things > > > to invalidate if the domain itself changes. > > > > > > So the nesting parent should have a list of CHILD_DEVTLB's that need > > > cleaning. That list is changed when the nesting domains are attached > > > to something. > > > > > > > probably just a naming confusion. it's called PARENT_IOTLB from the > > angle that this domain is used as a parent domain but actually it > > tracks the child tags in nested attach. > > Is NESTING_IOTLB more readable?
Yes
Jason
| |