From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"jasowang@redhat.com" <jasowang@redhat.com>,
"Hao, Xudong" <xudong.hao@intel.com>,
"peterx@redhat.com" <peterx@redhat.com>,
"Xu, Terrence" <terrence.xu@intel.com>,
"chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"mjrosato@linux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
"lulu@redhat.com" <lulu@redhat.com>,
"joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"eric.auger@redhat.com" <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>,
"cohuck@redhat.com" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
"robin.murphy@arm.com" <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 1/5] iommufd: Create access in vfio_iommufd_emulated_bind()
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 11:49:37 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBhygasrWFAiaXIl@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZBGJzefTm4p/ReIu@Asurada-Nvidia>
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 02:03:09AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 06:50:53AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > > So, this preparatory series will add a pair of simple attach()
> > > and detach() APIs. Then the cdev series will add the locking
> > > and the ioas_unpin stuff as a rework of the detach() API.
>
> > > I think they can be something mingled... the sample code that
> > > I sent previously could take care of those conditions. But, I
> > > am also thinking a bit that maybe attach() does not need the
> > > locking? I can do a separate replace() function in this case.
> > >
> >
> > w/o locking then you need smp_store_release() and its pair.
> >
> > anyway it's not in perf critical path. Keeping lock for attach
> > is simpler and safe.
>
> OK. Basically I followed what Jason suggested by having three
> APIs and combined Kevin's inputs about the difference between
> the attach/replace(). I also updated the replace changes, and
> rebased all nesting (infrastructure, VT-d and SMMU):
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commits/wip/iommufd_nesting-03142023
>
> The major three changes for those APIs:
> [1] This adds iommufd_access_attach() in this series:
> "iommufd: Create access in vfio_iommufd_emulated_bind()"
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commit/34fba7509429380f828fb23dcca5ceaeb40e22b5
> [2] This adds iommufd_access_detach() in the cdev series:
> "iommufd/device: Add iommufd_access_detach() API"
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commit/4110522146ca1fc0d5321c04a097e2c9d9e26af4
> [3] This adds iommufd_access_replace() in the replace series:
> "iommufd: Add iommufd_access_replace() API"
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commit/36507fa9f0f42cf1a5bebe7c9bc2bf319b7654a8
>
> Please check if they look okay, so that Yi can integrate them
> accordingly to the emulated/cdev series.
I don't understand why this is being put in front of the cdev series?
Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"mjrosato@linux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
"jasowang@redhat.com" <jasowang@redhat.com>,
"Hao, Xudong" <xudong.hao@intel.com>,
"peterx@redhat.com" <peterx@redhat.com>,
"Xu, Terrence" <terrence.xu@intel.com>,
"chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"lulu@redhat.com" <lulu@redhat.com>,
"joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"eric.auger@redhat.com" <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
"alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>,
"cohuck@redhat.com" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
"robin.murphy@arm.com" <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] iommufd: Create access in vfio_iommufd_emulated_bind()
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 11:49:37 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBhygasrWFAiaXIl@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZBGJzefTm4p/ReIu@Asurada-Nvidia>
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 02:03:09AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 06:50:53AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > > So, this preparatory series will add a pair of simple attach()
> > > and detach() APIs. Then the cdev series will add the locking
> > > and the ioas_unpin stuff as a rework of the detach() API.
>
> > > I think they can be something mingled... the sample code that
> > > I sent previously could take care of those conditions. But, I
> > > am also thinking a bit that maybe attach() does not need the
> > > locking? I can do a separate replace() function in this case.
> > >
> >
> > w/o locking then you need smp_store_release() and its pair.
> >
> > anyway it's not in perf critical path. Keeping lock for attach
> > is simpler and safe.
>
> OK. Basically I followed what Jason suggested by having three
> APIs and combined Kevin's inputs about the difference between
> the attach/replace(). I also updated the replace changes, and
> rebased all nesting (infrastructure, VT-d and SMMU):
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commits/wip/iommufd_nesting-03142023
>
> The major three changes for those APIs:
> [1] This adds iommufd_access_attach() in this series:
> "iommufd: Create access in vfio_iommufd_emulated_bind()"
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commit/34fba7509429380f828fb23dcca5ceaeb40e22b5
> [2] This adds iommufd_access_detach() in the cdev series:
> "iommufd/device: Add iommufd_access_detach() API"
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commit/4110522146ca1fc0d5321c04a097e2c9d9e26af4
> [3] This adds iommufd_access_replace() in the replace series:
> "iommufd: Add iommufd_access_replace() API"
> https://github.com/nicolinc/iommufd/commit/36507fa9f0f42cf1a5bebe7c9bc2bf319b7654a8
>
> Please check if they look okay, so that Yi can integrate them
> accordingly to the emulated/cdev series.
I don't understand why this is being put in front of the cdev series?
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-20 14:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-08 13:13 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 0/5] vfio: Make emulated devices prepared for vfio device cdev Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 1/5] iommufd: Create access in vfio_iommufd_emulated_bind() Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-10 2:08 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 2:08 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-14 18:50 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-14 18:50 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 6:16 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 6:16 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 6:21 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 6:21 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 6:52 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 6:52 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 8:52 ` [Intel-gfx] " Liu, Yi L
2023-03-15 8:52 ` Liu, Yi L
2023-03-16 0:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 0:17 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 0:28 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 0:28 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-10 17:36 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 17:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-14 8:20 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-14 8:20 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 1:01 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 1:01 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 6:15 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 6:15 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 6:32 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 6:32 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 6:50 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 6:50 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-15 9:03 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 9:03 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-15 12:18 ` [Intel-gfx] " Liu, Yi L
2023-03-15 12:18 ` Liu, Yi L
2023-03-16 0:32 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 0:32 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 2:53 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 2:53 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 3:25 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 3:25 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 5:33 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 5:33 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 5:38 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 5:38 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 5:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 5:43 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 5:49 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 5:49 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-16 5:56 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 5:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2023-03-16 6:01 ` [Intel-gfx] " Liu, Yi L
2023-03-16 6:01 ` Liu, Yi L
2023-03-20 14:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2023-03-20 14:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-20 15:11 ` [Intel-gfx] " Yi Liu
2023-03-20 15:11 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-20 15:33 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-20 15:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-08 13:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 2/5] vfio-iommufd: No need to record iommufd_ctx in vfio_device Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-10 17:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 17:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-08 13:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 3/5] vfio-iommufd: Make vfio_iommufd_emulated_bind() return iommufd_access ID Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-10 2:08 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 2:08 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 17:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 17:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-08 13:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 4/5] Samples/mdev: Uses the vfio emulated iommufd ops set in the mdev sample drivers Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-10 2:10 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 2:10 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 17:39 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 17:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-08 13:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v1 5/5] vfio: Check the presence for iommufd callbacks in __vfio_register_dev() Yi Liu
2023-03-08 13:13 ` Yi Liu
2023-03-10 2:15 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 2:15 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 14:04 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 14:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 14:12 ` [Intel-gfx] " Liu, Yi L
2023-03-10 14:12 ` Liu, Yi L
2023-03-10 15:25 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 15:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-13 1:49 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2023-03-13 1:49 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-03-10 17:39 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-10 17:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-03-15 12:15 ` [Intel-gfx] " Liu, Yi L
2023-03-15 12:15 ` Liu, Yi L
2023-03-08 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for vfio: Make emulated devices prepared for vfio device cdev Patchwork
2023-03-08 14:54 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2023-03-15 6:25 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for vfio: Make emulated devices prepared for vfio device cdev (rev2) Patchwork
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=ZBhygasrWFAiaXIl@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lulu@redhat.com \
--cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=terrence.xu@intel.com \
--cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.com \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com \
/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.