From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, nicolinc@nvidia.com,
jean-philippe@linaro.org, tina.zhang@intel.com,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Tomas Krcka <krckatom@amazon.de>,
Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-sva: Remove bond refcount
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2023 09:38:42 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPchUhnSFjVpkKCe@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230905194849.v1.2.Id3ab7cf665bcead097654937233a645722a4cce3@changeid>
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 07:49:13PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> Always allocate a new arm_smmu_bond in __arm_smmu_sva_bind and remove
> the bond refcount since arm_smmu_bond can never be shared across calls
> to __arm_smmu_sva_bind.
>
> The iommu framework will not allocate multiple SVA domains for the same
> (device/mm) pair, nor will it call set_dev_pasid for a device if a
> domain is already attached on the given pasid. There's also a one-to-one
> mapping between MM and PASID. __arm_smmu_sva_bind is therefore never
> called with the same (device/mm) pair, and so there's no reason to try
> and normalize allocations of the arm_smmu_bond struct for a (device/mm)
> pair across set_dev_pasid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
> ---
> Note that this is true today because iommu_sva_bind_device calls
> iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid to elude the iommu_attach_device_pasid if
> a domain is already attached.
> But even with Tina's patch series where iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid
> is no longer used, iommu_attach_device_pasid also checks whether a
> domain is already attached in the group's pasid_array.
>
> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c | 12 +-----------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 11 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, nicolinc@nvidia.com,
jean-philippe@linaro.org, tina.zhang@intel.com,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Tomas Krcka <krckatom@amazon.de>,
Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-sva: Remove bond refcount
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2023 09:38:42 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPchUhnSFjVpkKCe@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230905194849.v1.2.Id3ab7cf665bcead097654937233a645722a4cce3@changeid>
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 07:49:13PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> Always allocate a new arm_smmu_bond in __arm_smmu_sva_bind and remove
> the bond refcount since arm_smmu_bond can never be shared across calls
> to __arm_smmu_sva_bind.
>
> The iommu framework will not allocate multiple SVA domains for the same
> (device/mm) pair, nor will it call set_dev_pasid for a device if a
> domain is already attached on the given pasid. There's also a one-to-one
> mapping between MM and PASID. __arm_smmu_sva_bind is therefore never
> called with the same (device/mm) pair, and so there's no reason to try
> and normalize allocations of the arm_smmu_bond struct for a (device/mm)
> pair across set_dev_pasid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>
> ---
> Note that this is true today because iommu_sva_bind_device calls
> iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid to elude the iommu_attach_device_pasid if
> a domain is already attached.
> But even with Tina's patch series where iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid
> is no longer used, iommu_attach_device_pasid also checks whether a
> domain is already attached in the group's pasid_array.
>
> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c | 12 +-----------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 11 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Jason
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-05 12:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-05 11:49 [PATCH v1 0/3] Clean-up arm-smmu-v3-sva.c: remove arm_smmu_bond Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 11:49 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 11:49 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-sva: Remove unused iommu_sva handle Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 11:49 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 12:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 12:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 11:49 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-sva: Remove bond refcount Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 11:49 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 12:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2023-09-05 12:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 11:49 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-sva: Remove arm_smmu_bond Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 11:49 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 12:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 12:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 13:14 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 13:14 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 18:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 18:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 12:35 ` [PATCH v1 0/3] Clean-up arm-smmu-v3-sva.c: remove arm_smmu_bond Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 12:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 13:24 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 13:24 ` Michael Shavit
2023-09-05 13:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-09-05 13:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-10-12 18:06 ` Will Deacon
2023-10-12 18:06 ` Will Deacon
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=ZPchUhnSFjVpkKCe@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=krckatom@amazon.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mshavit@google.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=tina.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.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.