From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:48:12 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: PPC: Add support for IOMMU in-kernel handling Message-Id: <51C2C1CC.9000003@ozlabs.ru> List-Id: References: <1371422343.21896.143.camel@pasglop> <1371438800.22681.38.camel@ul30vt.home> <1371441361.21896.152.camel@pasglop> <1371522772.22681.140.camel@ul30vt.home> <87txkun568.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1371617970.21896.232.camel@pasglop> <1371653443.21896.291.camel@pasglop> <1371656989.22659.98.camel@ul30vt.home> <51C28BEA.8050501@ozlabs.ru> <20130620052822.GB3140@voom.redhat.com> <1371714449.3944.14.camel@pasglop> In-Reply-To: <1371714449.3944.14.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: David Gibson , Alex Williamson , Alexander Graf , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , "kvm@vger.kernel.org mailing list" , open list , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell , Joerg Roedel On 06/20/2013 05:47 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 15:28 +1000, David Gibson wrote: >>> Just out of curiosity - would not get_file() and fput_atomic() on a >> group's >>> file* do the right job instead of vfio_group_add_external_user() and >>> vfio_group_del_external_user()? >> >> I was thinking that too. Grabbing a file reference would certainly be >> the usual way of handling this sort of thing. > > But that wouldn't prevent the group ownership to be returned to > the kernel or another user would it ? Holding the file pointer does not let the group->container_users counter go to zero and this is exactly what vfio_group_add_external_user() and vfio_group_del_external_user() do. The difference is only in absolute value - 2 vs. 3. No change in behaviour whether I use new vfio API or simply hold file* till KVM closes fd created when IOMMU was connected to LIOBN. And while this counter is not zero, QEMU cannot take ownership over the group. I am definitely still missing the bigger picture... -- Alexey From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-x22a.google.com (mail-ie0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC6CF2C02A3 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:48:24 +1000 (EST) Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id e11so16222977iej.29 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51C2C1CC.9000003@ozlabs.ru> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:48:12 +1000 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: PPC: Add support for IOMMU in-kernel handling References: <1371422343.21896.143.camel@pasglop> <1371438800.22681.38.camel@ul30vt.home> <1371441361.21896.152.camel@pasglop> <1371522772.22681.140.camel@ul30vt.home> <87txkun568.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1371617970.21896.232.camel@pasglop> <1371653443.21896.291.camel@pasglop> <1371656989.22659.98.camel@ul30vt.home> <51C28BEA.8050501@ozlabs.ru> <20130620052822.GB3140@voom.redhat.com> <1371714449.3944.14.camel@pasglop> In-Reply-To: <1371714449.3944.14.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org mailing list" , Joerg Roedel , Rusty Russell , Alexander Graf , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, open list , Alex Williamson , Paul Mackerras , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, David Gibson List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 06/20/2013 05:47 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 15:28 +1000, David Gibson wrote: >>> Just out of curiosity - would not get_file() and fput_atomic() on a >> group's >>> file* do the right job instead of vfio_group_add_external_user() and >>> vfio_group_del_external_user()? >> >> I was thinking that too. Grabbing a file reference would certainly be >> the usual way of handling this sort of thing. > > But that wouldn't prevent the group ownership to be returned to > the kernel or another user would it ? Holding the file pointer does not let the group->container_users counter go to zero and this is exactly what vfio_group_add_external_user() and vfio_group_del_external_user() do. The difference is only in absolute value - 2 vs. 3. No change in behaviour whether I use new vfio API or simply hold file* till KVM closes fd created when IOMMU was connected to LIOBN. And while this counter is not zero, QEMU cannot take ownership over the group. I am definitely still missing the bigger picture... -- Alexey From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: PPC: Add support for IOMMU in-kernel handling Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:48:12 +1000 Message-ID: <51C2C1CC.9000003@ozlabs.ru> References: <1371422343.21896.143.camel@pasglop> <1371438800.22681.38.camel@ul30vt.home> <1371441361.21896.152.camel@pasglop> <1371522772.22681.140.camel@ul30vt.home> <87txkun568.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1371617970.21896.232.camel@pasglop> <1371653443.21896.291.camel@pasglop> <1371656989.22659.98.camel@ul30vt.home> <51C28BEA.8050501@ozlabs.ru> <20130620052822.GB3140@voom.redhat.com> <1371714449.3944.14.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Gibson , Alex Williamson , Alexander Graf , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , "kvm@vger.kernel.org mailing list" , open list , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell , Joerg Roedel To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1371714449.3944.14.camel@pasglop> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 06/20/2013 05:47 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 15:28 +1000, David Gibson wrote: >>> Just out of curiosity - would not get_file() and fput_atomic() on a >> group's >>> file* do the right job instead of vfio_group_add_external_user() and >>> vfio_group_del_external_user()? >> >> I was thinking that too. Grabbing a file reference would certainly be >> the usual way of handling this sort of thing. > > But that wouldn't prevent the group ownership to be returned to > the kernel or another user would it ? Holding the file pointer does not let the group->container_users counter go to zero and this is exactly what vfio_group_add_external_user() and vfio_group_del_external_user() do. The difference is only in absolute value - 2 vs. 3. No change in behaviour whether I use new vfio API or simply hold file* till KVM closes fd created when IOMMU was connected to LIOBN. And while this counter is not zero, QEMU cannot take ownership over the group. I am definitely still missing the bigger picture... -- Alexey