lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 1/8] iommu: Add iommu_group_replace_domain()
From
On 2022-02-14 12:45, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 12:09:36PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 2022-01-06 02:20, Lu Baolu wrote:
>>> Expose an interface to replace the domain of an iommu group for frameworks
>>> like vfio which claims the ownership of the whole iommu group.
>>
>> But if the underlying point is the new expectation that
>> iommu_{attach,detach}_device() operate on the device's whole group where
>> relevant, why should we invent some special mechanism for VFIO to be
>> needlessly inconsistent?
>>
>> I said before that it's trivial for VFIO to resolve a suitable device if it
>> needs to; by now I've actually written the patch ;)
>>
>> https://gitlab.arm.com/linux-arm/linux-rm/-/commit/9f37d8c17c9b606abc96e1f1001c0b97c8b93ed5
>
> Er, how does locking work there? What keeps busdev from being
> concurrently unplugged?

Same thing that prevents the bus pointer from suddenly becoming invalid
in the current code, I guess :)

But yes, holding a group reference alone can't prevent the group itself
from changing, and the finer points of locking still need working out -
there's a reason you got a link to a WIP branch in my tree rather than a
proper patch in your inbox (TBH at the moment that one represents about
a 5:1 ratio of time spent on the reasoning behind the commit message vs.
the implementation itself).

> How can iommu_group_get() be safely called on
> this pointer?

VFIO hardly needs to retrieve the iommu_group from a device which it
derived from the iommu_group it holds in the first place. What matters
is being able to call *other* device-based IOMMU API interfaces in the
long term. And once a robust solution for that is in place, it should
inevitably work for a device-based attach interface too.

> All of the above only works normally inside a probe/remove context
> where the driver core is blocking concurrent unplug and descruction.
>
> I think I said this last time you brought it up that lifetime was the
> challenge with this idea.

Indeed, but it's a challenge that needs tackling, because the bus-based
interfaces need to go away. So either we figure it out now and let this
attach interface rework benefit immediately, or I spend three times as
long solving it on my own and end up deleting
iommu_group_replace_domain() in about 6 months' time anyway.

Thanks,
Robin.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-02-14 15:11    [W:0.077 / U:1.904 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site