From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>,
kevin.tian@intel.com, corbet@lwn.net, will@kernel.org,
joro@8bytes.org, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com,
robin.murphy@arm.com, dwmw2@infradead.org,
baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, shuah@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
eric.auger@redhat.com, jean-philippe@linaro.org, mdf@kernel.org,
mshavit@google.com, shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com,
smostafa@google.com, ddutile@redhat.com, yi.l.liu@intel.com,
patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 13/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Report events that belong to devices attached to vIOMMU
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 19:35:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250224233505.GF520155@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z7zrHn3tPBD5chv1@Asurada-Nvidia>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 01:56:46PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > Just thinking out loud here:
> > I understand the goal here is to "emulate" an IOMMU. But I'm just
> > wondering if we could report struct events instead of the raw event?
> >
> > For example, can't we have something like arm_smmu_event here with the
> > sid changed to vsid?
> >
> > Are we taking the raw event since we want to keep the `u64 event_data[]`
> > field within `struct iommufd_vevent` generic to all architectures?
>
> The ABIs for vSMMU are defined in the HW languange, e.g. cmd, ste.
> Thus, here evt in raw too.
Right, the point is that it gives as a safe uABI that is effectively
being managed by ARM.
If we make our own thing then we have to take the responsiblity to
make it safe and extensible. I don't see a justification to do that..
It is the same discussion we had around the vSTE as input, the raw
invalidation command and the IDRs. Since we've already done 'follow
the SMMU spec' so many times already now we should keep doing it.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-24 23:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-22 15:53 [PATCH v7 00/14] iommufd: Add vIOMMU infrastructure (Part-3: vEVENTQ) Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:53 ` [PATCH v7 01/14] iommufd/fault: Move two fault functions out of the header Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:53 ` [PATCH v7 02/14] iommufd/fault: Add an iommufd_fault_init() helper Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 03/14] iommufd: Abstract an iommufd_eventq from iommufd_fault Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 04/14] iommufd: Rename fault.c to eventq.c Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 05/14] iommufd: Add IOMMUFD_OBJ_VEVENTQ and IOMMUFD_CMD_VEVENTQ_ALLOC Nicolin Chen
2025-02-25 15:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 06/14] iommufd/viommu: Add iommufd_viommu_get_vdev_id helper Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 07/14] iommufd/viommu: Add iommufd_viommu_report_event helper Nicolin Chen
2025-02-25 15:40 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 08/14] iommufd/selftest: Require vdev_id when attaching to a nested domain Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 09/14] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_TEST_OP_TRIGGER_VEVENT for vEVENTQ coverage Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 10/14] iommufd/selftest: Add IOMMU_VEVENTQ_ALLOC test coverage Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 11/14] Documentation: userspace-api: iommufd: Update FAULT and VEVENTQ Nicolin Chen
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 12/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce struct arm_smmu_vmaster Nicolin Chen
2025-02-24 20:35 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-24 21:31 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-24 21:53 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-24 22:24 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-24 23:45 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-25 16:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-25 16:41 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-25 17:08 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-25 17:22 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-25 16:45 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 13/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Report events that belong to devices attached to vIOMMU Nicolin Chen
2025-02-24 21:35 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-24 21:56 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-02-24 23:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-02-25 16:50 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-25 16:47 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2025-02-25 16:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-22 15:54 ` [PATCH v7 14/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Set MEV bit in nested STE for DoS mitigations Nicolin Chen
2025-02-24 4:38 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
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=20250224233505.GF520155@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=ddutile@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mdf@kernel.org \
--cc=mshavit@google.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yi.l.liu@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).