From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sender4-pp-f112.zoho.com (sender4-pp-f112.zoho.com [136.143.188.112]) (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 F3D862E36ED; Sat, 5 Jul 2025 10:04:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=136.143.188.112 ARC-Seal:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751709879; cv=pass; b=LFmVX9QfUBhCXVOaAQ48TQvgrDnw1Eo3crEk/QN8bsm1QBwWdvzDqeZV7FgBUfPhuziD/0fiWRhzwaPkkMa1ol8ycy6SoIq8WWFPZEZYplN1OOP1o6TJOBBXt0tZYPOwiET865TOvWgnJMjXbCmi7KN3u4a54CNKje+CcouaaD8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751709879; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AFm0hKYWXZnKo6+zcZUUrSRbxBkQoLoEP1go/dH+c9M=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=t1i7ZzvHgixqk2/I4oW7LbAcMZclbJxJui+ZKrbXJE3/zHn52dRMKuocUeVX8BmTMw7jy8xUzLXrYg0fI9jFNTNidAGkqMi0EpThJoj1liqR7upSPV5HsVVsk2Ln6IZyuOroGk83dwVKLZmWN5YoHA2dHexPZ0p1+m2iOMH7wSk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=2; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com header.b=Z5qpHdf6; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=136.143.188.112 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com header.b="Z5qpHdf6" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1751709851; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=XuHk2ri8GSG4lBxChP/+R6h/v0JjJM7fresgHKd0dLQn7uzcCA0hY+emJrQhYBCdOSc1ZM+3CQfTZ51403WyvoVQyaVlV8C1KuhVhrRyyQ/q4h6xdYleLuY9wCU4wCYYQKmDFDpn+onBU63L3ZpmEm2vlSZtRNA8gRSK7vxB068= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1751709851; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=RviDwvDQqjYXFY5scaKMdpbhX+ttH9CgIKwYVhmfk4c=; b=GpxsAABxo7BDZ6TD42gmws+/uPa4EuRGWNAbg3Rha+bP6/vul0ntR2oOKCf9Be0LOVfVit1MF1q+uARLbBFIGS8RsjHocvx/pdESm12H9czkFj+qz7IaymK1tkvgqkmSBVqs4fYBu49sGBPo9FF28P+l2nOlkgWBPwD7Ve9VFXw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1751709851; s=zohomail; d=collabora.com; i=benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com; h=Message-ID:Date:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:Subject:To:To:Cc:Cc:References:From:From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=RviDwvDQqjYXFY5scaKMdpbhX+ttH9CgIKwYVhmfk4c=; b=Z5qpHdf60CuJzdWjIWkZgUznVTXkHbdc/Pd/98TEepfRGmwJBpxsOnPmOJd4VJcM gvGlpvMDBtOfKFQsL2IIU4x5AjB+k/uBMIE2mos1U25Y8u2LY+n3gClKyXzFeaUFYfS LrwqKZSuON4ppy5BZR7SqslbdI6ChRjO+DRCEjWs= Received: by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1751709849751114.53291093115388; Sat, 5 Jul 2025 03:04:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <62cead85-2d50-45f1-8020-7aea77f6833b@collabora.com> Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2025 12:04:05 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] iommu: Add verisilicon IOMMU driver To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: joro@8bytes.org, will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, robh@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, heiko@sntech.de, nicolas.dufresne@collabora.com, iommu@lists.linux.dev, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, kernel@collabora.com References: <20250623153931.158765-1-benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com> <20250623153931.158765-4-benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com> <20250704175425.GM904431@ziepe.ca> Content-Language: en-US From: Benjamin Gaignard In-Reply-To: <20250704175425.GM904431@ziepe.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 04/07/2025 à 19:54, Jason Gunthorpe a écrit : > On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 05:39:27PM +0200, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: >> The Verisilicon IOMMU hardware block can be found in combination >> with Verisilicon hardware video codecs (encoders or decoders) on >> different SoCs. >> Enable it will allow us to use non contiguous memory allocators >> for Verisilicon video codecs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard >> --- >> change in version 4: >> - Kconfig dependencies >> - Fix the remarks done by Jason and Robin: locking, clocks, macros >> probing, pm_runtime, atomic allocation. > It broadly seems OK to me > > Though I did notice this: > >> +static struct iommu_domain *vsi_iommu_domain_alloc_paging(struct device *dev) >> +{ >> + struct vsi_iommu *iommu = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev); >> + struct vsi_iommu_domain *vsi_domain; >> + >> + vsi_domain = kzalloc(sizeof(*vsi_domain), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!vsi_domain) >> + return NULL; >> + >> + vsi_domain->iommu = iommu; > So we store the iommu in the domain? And use the iommu->lock all over > the place > >> +static int vsi_iommu_attach_device(struct iommu_domain *domain, >> + struct device *dev) >> +{ >> + struct vsi_iommu *iommu = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev); >> + struct vsi_iommu_domain *vsi_domain = to_vsi_domain(domain); >> + unsigned long flags; >> + int ret = 0; >> + >> + ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(iommu->dev); >> + if (ret < 0) >> + return ret; >> + >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&iommu->lock, flags); >> + /* iommu already attached */ >> + if (iommu->domain == domain) >> + goto unlock; > But here we don't check that the domain matches the iommu of dev. > > This seems a bit weird to me, I didn't quite get why the domain uses > iommu->lock instead of just having its own per-domain lock? > > But if it does use iommu->lock then this does need to prevent using > domains with the wrong iommu because the also use the wrong lock and > then this: I would like to avoid that but maybe a static spinlock can solve that problem ? Regards, Benjamin > >> + >> + vsi_iommu_enable(iommu, domain); >> + list_add_tail(&iommu->node, &vsi_domain->iommus); > Is not safe? > > Jason