Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] iommu/sva: Explicitly exclude RID_PASID from SVA

[Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>]

Hi Kevin,

On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:40:12 +0000, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
wrote:

> > From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
> > Sent: Friday, April 28, 2023 1:50 AM
> > 
> > SVA PASID allocation is hardcoded to start from 1 because 0 is used for
> > RID_PASID, let's make it explicit to avoid the potential conflicts.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c
> > index c434b95dc8eb..ac7c93bacb5c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva.c
> > @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ struct iommu_sva *iommu_sva_bind_device(struct
> > device *dev, struct mm_struct *mm
> >  		return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> > 
> >  	/* Allocate mm->pasid if necessary. */
> > -	ret = iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(mm, 1, max_pasids - 1);
> > +	ret = iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(mm, IOMMU_DEF_RID_PASID + 1,
> > max_pasids - 1);  
> 
> To be future proof it's probably cleaner to define a
> IOMMU_MAX_RSVD_PASID in case there may be more reserved
> pasids in future usages?
 much better, will do.

Thanks,

Jacob