From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07CEE1B946 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 02:57:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712113063; cv=none; b=PtMyvjtVOAt3jNpBPcWEdI4udT6i/Stg3ZdFOS0l+MC3wIaS+RwdrrlhftYWk2lbwrNzQRcEXDKLY5s1xX3n71k8iZ+/KmO5saWd4uOFEIePyOnpXcZOqew508B3MORao/E/DRiLtFIxxSuHGIR4lqIi2lvc/N28ukL8CA9ZQew= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712113063; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EZG5B5nQA7tIQjM2mjKjMtuTZET9KVGrMdjZG712+CI=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Cc:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=nKwqGyRm/rlHZBlDpgpZ4WLLWqpFbTRTk6TXpI9w4u4OBJXqRB9RhzH8OOtU8h2B21qF5joAYSvnRjlSBo7F4CGrpYVkz5MCxx16rJp+Xsnrs+pg4h9ADpLWQIbU21PbZznMocr/5KnNeu3aO5EqL7fMrKFu0JjYvNWKnCJfEnE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=d3uhIcyf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="d3uhIcyf" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1712113062; x=1743649062; h=message-id:date:mime-version:cc:subject:to:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=EZG5B5nQA7tIQjM2mjKjMtuTZET9KVGrMdjZG712+CI=; b=d3uhIcyf+ET3wT8fSM71sr9GdBB2CNTCcqq3ehk8iC46lj2ozUsYSLqp AFUrm9u/7aovpHqSwFolkkPD3QkC6xu1u0DWaolrDLy/nDYO+D7NgxQzE AXmiy0fme7ZsT0BB6u/eZ+Jk91B+YkNoThTje5rVmXy/U+3DaTcsUHSVZ +e8ZxR2St+vMTVcYFLmCbF0ZIRu2tuN/yJ4Bpy6osE4CUJCjAHWmI4cga vCtGlLZBuTyFjQ04aU/n32ccA11iCcPzrAEQxQI3lujXx/qMF5WibFAkj bvfll41ehWdaPhL4avkexRP9C9MLC5CbzKxjpXfb84QgAC5o+rsHmg/jl Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: vO6nJIcdQBazNF/dkHxstw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: ptBvSawRTzajhHXKyTWPxw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11032"; a="10292038" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,176,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="10292038" Received: from orviesa008.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.148]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Apr 2024 19:57:41 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: VuTP63v/QsaOd/tQxDxVzw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: ip8kNLhtRVm33HlrdTUQ2A== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,176,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="18866882" Received: from allen-box.sh.intel.com (HELO [10.239.159.127]) ([10.239.159.127]) by orviesa008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Apr 2024 19:57:38 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:56:38 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, "alex.williamson@redhat.com" , "robin.murphy@arm.com" , "eric.auger@redhat.com" , "nicolinc@nvidia.com" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com" , "iommu@lists.linux.dev" , "Pan, Jacob jun" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Two enhancements to iommu_at[de]tach_device_pasid() To: "Duan, Zhenzhong" , "Liu, Yi L" , "joro@8bytes.org" , "jgg@nvidia.com" , "Tian, Kevin" References: <20240328122958.83332-1-yi.l.liu@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Baolu Lu In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 3/29/24 10:12 AM, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Liu, Yi L >> Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] Two enhancements to >> iommu_at[de]tach_device_pasid() >> >> There are minor mistakes in the iommu set_dev_pasid() and >> remove_dev_pasid() >> paths. The set_dev_pasid() path updates the group->pasid_array first, and >> then call into remove_dev_pasid() in error handling when there are devices >> within the group that failed to set_dev_pasid. > Not related to this patch, just curious in which cases some of the devices > In same group failed to set_dev_pasid while others succeed? The failure cases could be checked in the set_dev_pasid implementation of the individual iommu driver. For x86 platforms, which are PCI fabric- based, there's no such case as PCI/PASID requires a singleton iommu group. Best regards, baolu