From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: "Jörg Rödel" <joro@8bytes.org>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] iommu: Add device dma ownership set/release interfaces
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:16:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48cf6b2b-28ee-178d-6471-460e781e7b20@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211119150612.jhsvsbzisvux2lga@8bytes.org>
Hi Joerg,
On 11/19/21 11:06 PM, Jörg Rödel wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 07:14:10PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>> The singleton group requirement for iommu_attach/detach_device() was
>> added by below commit:
>>
>> commit 426a273834eae65abcfc7132a21a85b3151e0bce
>> Author: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
>> Date: Thu May 28 18:41:30 2015 +0200
>>
>> iommu: Limit iommu_attach/detach_device to devices with their own group
>>
>> This patch changes the behavior of the iommu_attach_device
>> and iommu_detach_device functions. With this change these
>> functions only work on devices that have their own group.
>> For all other devices the iommu_group_attach/detach
>> functions must be used.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
>>
>> Joerg,can you please shed some light on the background of this
>> requirement? Does above idea of transition from singleton group
>> to group with single driver bound make sense to you?
>
> This change came to be because the iommu_attach/detach_device()
> interface doesn't fit well into a world with iommu-groups. Devices
> within a group are by definition not isolated between each other, so
> they must all be in the same address space (== iommu_domain). So it
> doesn't make sense to allow attaching a single device within a group to
> a different iommu_domain.
Thanks for the explanation. It's very helpful. There seems to be a lot
of discussions around this, but I didn't see any meaningful reasons to
break the assumption of "all devices in a group being in a same address
space".
Best regards,
baolu
>
> I know that in theory it is safe to allow devices within a group to be
> in different domains because there iommu-groups catch multiple
> non-isolation cases:
>
> 1) Devices behind a non-ACS capable bridge or multiple functions
> of a PCI device. Here it is safe to put the devices into
> different iommu-domains as long as all affected devices are
> controlled by the same owner.
>
> 2) Devices which share a single request-id and can't be
> differentiated by the IOMMU hardware. These always need to be
> in the same iommu_domain.
>
> To lift the single-domain-per-group requirement the iommu core code
> needs to learn the difference between the two cases above.
>
> Regards,
>
> Joerg
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-20 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-15 2:05 [PATCH 00/11] Fix BUG_ON in vfio_iommu_group_notifier() Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 01/11] iommu: Add device dma ownership set/release interfaces Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 13:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-16 1:57 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-16 13:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-17 5:22 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-17 13:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-18 1:12 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-18 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-18 2:39 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-11-18 13:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-19 5:44 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-11-19 11:14 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-19 15:06 ` Jörg Rödel
2021-11-19 15:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-20 11:16 ` Lu Baolu [this message]
2021-11-19 12:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 20:38 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-11-16 1:52 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 02/11] driver core: Set DMA ownership during driver bind/unbind Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 6:59 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-11-15 13:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-15 13:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 13:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-15 13:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 15:37 ` Robin Murphy
2021-11-15 15:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 18:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-15 18:35 ` Robin Murphy
2021-11-15 19:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 03/11] PCI: pci_stub: Suppress kernel DMA ownership auto-claiming Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 13:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-15 13:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 15:14 ` Robin Murphy
2021-11-15 16:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 17:54 ` Robin Murphy
2021-11-15 18:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-15 18:44 ` Robin Murphy
2021-11-15 19:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 20:58 ` Robin Murphy
2021-11-15 21:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 20:48 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-11-15 22:17 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-11-16 6:05 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 04/11] PCI: portdrv: " Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 20:44 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-11-16 7:24 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-16 20:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-11-16 20:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 05/11] iommu: Add security context management for assigned devices Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 13:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-16 7:25 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 06/11] iommu: Expose group variants of dma ownership interfaces Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 13:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-16 9:42 ` Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 07/11] vfio: Use DMA_OWNER_USER to declaim passthrough devices Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 08/11] vfio: Remove use of vfio_group_viable() Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 09/11] vfio: Delete the unbound_list Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 10/11] vfio: Remove iommu group notifier Lu Baolu
2021-11-15 2:05 ` [PATCH 11/11] iommu: Remove iommu group changes notifier Lu Baolu
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=48cf6b2b-28ee-178d-6471-460e781e7b20@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kch@nvidia.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox