From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, joro@8bytes.org,
jean-philippe@linaro.org, miko.lenczewski@arm.com,
balbirs@nvidia.com, peterz@infradead.org, smostafa@google.com,
kevin.tian@intel.com, praan@google.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH rfcv2 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce a per-domain arm_smmu_invs array
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 18:29:12 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250924212912.GP2617119@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <80310b98efa4bd7e95d7b3ca302f40d4d69e59c5.1757373449.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com>
On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 04:26:58PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> +/**
> + * arm_smmu_invs_merge() - Merge @to_merge into @invs and generate a new array
> + * @invs: the base invalidation array
> + * @to_merge: an array of invlidations to merge
> + *
> + * Return: a newly allocated array on success, or ERR_PTR
> + *
> + * This function must be locked and serialized with arm_smmu_invs_unref() and
> + * arm_smmu_invs_purge(), but do not lockdep on any lock for KUNIT test.
> + *
> + * Either @invs or @to_merge must be sorted itself. This ensures the returned
s/Either/Both
A merge sort like this requires both lists to be sorted.
> +struct arm_smmu_invs *arm_smmu_invs_merge(struct arm_smmu_invs *invs,
> + struct arm_smmu_invs *to_merge)
> +{
> + struct arm_smmu_invs *new_invs;
> + struct arm_smmu_inv *new;
> + size_t num_adds = 0;
> + size_t num_dels = 0;
> + size_t i, j;
> +
> + for (i = j = 0; i != invs->num_invs || j != to_merge->num_invs;) {
> + int cmp = arm_smmu_invs_merge_cmp(invs, i, to_merge, j);
> +
> + if (cmp < 0) {
> + /* no found in to_merge, leave alone but delete trash */
s/no/not/
> + if (!refcount_read(&invs->inv[i].users))
> + num_dels++;
> + i++;
This sequence related to users should be consistent in all the merge
sorts. The one below in unref is the best one:
+ int cmp;
+
+ if (!refcount_read(&invs->inv[i].users)) {
+ num_dels++;
+ i++;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ cmp = arm_smmu_invs_merge_cmp(invs, i, to_unref, j);
Make all of these loops look like that
> +
> + WARN_ON(new != new_invs->inv + new_invs->num_invs);
> +
> + return new_invs;
A debugging check that the output list is sorted would be a nice touch
for robustness.
I think this looks OK and has turned out to be pretty simple.
I've been thinking about generalizing it to core code and I think it
would hold up well there as well?
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-24 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-08 23:26 [PATCH rfcv2 0/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce an RCU-protected invalidation array Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 1/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Clear cmds->num after arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09 3:16 ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-09 5:42 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09 22:49 ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-10 2:03 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-10 2:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 2/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Explicitly set smmu_domain->stage for SVA Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09 3:25 ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-09 22:31 ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-10 2:06 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 3/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add an inline arm_smmu_domain_free() Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce a per-domain arm_smmu_invs array Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09 13:01 ` kernel test robot
2025-09-20 0:26 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-09-29 18:52 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-30 12:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 5/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pre-allocate a per-master invalidation array Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 19:11 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-30 11:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:27 ` [PATCH rfcv2 6/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Populate smmu_domain->invs when attaching masters Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 20:52 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-30 12:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-30 20:19 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 16:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 17:16 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:27 ` [PATCH rfcv2 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add arm_smmu_invs based arm_smmu_domain_inv_range() Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 21:00 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:27 ` [PATCH rfcv2 8/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Perform per-domain invalidations using arm_smmu_invs Nicolin Chen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250924212912.GP2617119@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=balbirs@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miko.lenczewski@arm.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.