Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] iommu/vt-d: Move intel_drain_pasid_prq() into intel_pasid_tear_down_entry()

[Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>]

On 2024/9/12 21:22, Baolu Lu wrote:
> On 2024/9/12 21:04, Yi Liu wrote:
>> Draining PRQ is mostly conjuncted with pasid teardown, and with more 
>> callers coming,
>> move it into it in the intel_pasid_tear_down_entry(). But there is 
>> scenario that only
>> teardown pasid entry but no PRQ drain, so passing a flag to mark it.
> 
> Is it a reasonable case where PRI needs to be drained but the pasid
> entry won't be torn down? For example, could this happen when a PRI is
> disabled?

in concept, yes. But it seems no more than a debugging method in my
opinion. I cannot map it to a usage so far.

>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yi Liu<yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c |  8 ++++----
>>   drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c | 13 +++++++++++--
>>   drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.h |  8 +++++---
>>   drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c   |  3 ++-
>>   4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> Thanks,
> baolu

-- 
Regards,
Yi Liu