lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/2] iommu/s390: Fix race with release_device ops
From
On 2022-09-01 15:34, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 03:29:16PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>
>> Right, the next step would be to bridge that gap to iommu-dma to dump the
>> flush queue when IOVA allocation failure implies we've reached the
>> "rollover" point, and perhaps not use the timer at all. By that point a
>> dedicated domain type, or at least some definite internal flag, for this
>> alternate behaviour seems like the logical way to go.
>
> At least on this direction, I've been thinking it would be nice to
> replace the domain type _FQ with a flag inside the domain, maybe the
> ops, saying how the domain wants the common DMA API to operate. If it
> wants FQ mode or other tuning parameters

Compare the not-necessarily-obvious matrix of "strict" and "passthrough"
command-line parameters with the nice understandable kconfig and sysfs
controls for a reminder of why I moved things *from* that paradigm in
the first place ;)

This idea still fits perfectly into the the "continuum of strictness"
notion underlying that domain type rework, since it potentially leaves a
lot more address space mapped for a much longer time than our current FQ
implementation. I would agree that exposing FQ tuneables in their own
right may well have some potential value, much like John's equivalent
idea for the IOVA cache layer, but I for one have no desire to bring
back DOMAIN_ATTR_DMA_USE_FLUSH_QUEUE, much less any further mess of
disjoint properties at that level.

Thanks,
Robin.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-01 17:06    [W:0.097 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site