lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 15/22] iommu/vt-d: Replace Intel specific PASID allocator with IOASID
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:57:09 +0100
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 06:44:15 -0700
> Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Make use of generic IOASID code to manage PASID allocation,
> > free, and lookup. Replace Intel specific code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
> Hi Jacob,
>
> One question inline.
>
Hi Jonathan,

Sorry, I got distracted and missed your review. My answer
below.

Thanks!

Jacob

> Jonathan
>
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 11 +++++------
> > drivers/iommu/intel-pasid.c | 36
> > ------------------------------------ drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c |
> > 37 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 3 files changed, 26
> > insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
> > b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c index 5b84994..39b63fe 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
> > @@ -5167,7 +5167,7 @@ static void auxiliary_unlink_device(struct
> > dmar_domain *domain, domain->auxd_refcnt--;
> >
> > if (!domain->auxd_refcnt && domain->default_pasid > 0)
> > - intel_pasid_free_id(domain->default_pasid);
> > + ioasid_free(domain->default_pasid);
> > }
> >
> > static int aux_domain_add_dev(struct dmar_domain *domain,
> > @@ -5185,10 +5185,9 @@ static int aux_domain_add_dev(struct
> > dmar_domain *domain, if (domain->default_pasid <= 0) {
> > int pasid;
> >
> > - pasid = intel_pasid_alloc_id(domain, PASID_MIN,
> > -
> > pci_max_pasids(to_pci_dev(dev)),
> > - GFP_KERNEL);
> > - if (pasid <= 0) {
> > + pasid = ioasid_alloc(NULL, PASID_MIN,
> > pci_max_pasids(to_pci_dev(dev)) - 1,
> > + domain);
>
> Is there any point in passing the domain in as the private pointer
> here? I can't immediately see anywhere it is read back?
>
Good point, I agree. There is no need for passing the domain. aux domain
and its defaul_pasid has 1:1 mapping.

> It is also rather confusing as the same driver stashes two different
> types of data in the same xarray.

On VT-d, there should be only one type of data for all PASID users that
needs private data. Whether it is native SVA or guest SVA. Only an
internal flag will tell them apart.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-24 23:33    [W:0.077 / U:1.672 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site