From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] vfio: Move the sanity check of the group to vfio_create_group()
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 20:12:49 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yyzr8Qizg5BHy5yl@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220922152338.2a2238fe.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 03:23:38PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Well, we don't really need to have this behavior, we could choose to
> implement the first two patches with the caller holding the
> group_lock. Only one of the callers needs the duplicate test, no-iommu
> creates its own iommu_group and therefore cannot have an existing
> device. I think patches 1 & 2 would look like below*, with patch 3
> simply moving the change from vfio_group_get() to refcount_inc() into
> the equivalent place in vfio_group_find_of_alloc(). Thanks,
Yeah, this is nice
I just rebased it onto Kevins series and the reason I did this patch
has evaporated so let me check it again, maybe we don't need it.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-22 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-08 18:44 [PATCH 0/4] Fix splats releated to using the iommu_group after destroying devices Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-08 18:44 ` [PATCH 1/4] vfio: Simplify vfio_create_group() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-20 19:45 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-09-08 18:44 ` [PATCH 2/4] vfio: Move the sanity check of the group to vfio_create_group() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-22 19:10 ` Alex Williamson
2022-09-22 19:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-22 21:23 ` Alex Williamson
2022-09-22 23:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2022-09-08 18:45 ` [PATCH 3/4] vfio: Follow a strict lifetime for struct iommu_group * Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-20 19:32 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-09-08 18:45 ` [PATCH 4/4] iommu: Fix ordering of iommu_release_device() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-08 21:05 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-08 21:27 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-08 21:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 9:05 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-09 13:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 17:57 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-09 18:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 19:55 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-09 23:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-12 11:13 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-22 16:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 12:49 ` [PATCH 0/4] Fix splats releated to using the iommu_group after destroying devices Matthew Rosato
2022-09-09 16:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=Yyzr8Qizg5BHy5yl@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.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.