Re: [PATCH 10/14] iommufd-lu: Implement ioctl to let userspace mark an HWPT to be preserved

Samiullah Khawaja
2026-03-20T00:40:49Z

On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 04:35:32PM -0700, Vipin Sharma wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 10:09:44PM +0000, Samiullah Khawaja wrote:
>> From: YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei@google.com>
>> @@ -374,6 +374,10 @@ struct iommufd_hwpt_paging {
>> bool auto_domain : 1;
>> bool enforce_cache_coherency : 1;
>> bool nest_parent : 1;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IOMMU_LIVEUPDATE
>> + bool lu_preserve : 1;
>> + u32 lu_token;
>
>Should we use full name i.e. liveupdate here and other places in this
>series?

I think using full name liveupdate would be too long in other places in
this series. And also there are other examples of "luo" being used as a
short form. Please see:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251125165850.3389713-15-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com/
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c b/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
>> index 5cc4b08c25f5..e1a9b3051f65 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
>> @@ -493,6 +493,8 @@ static const struct iommufd_ioctl_op iommufd_ioctl_ops[] = {
>> __reserved),
>> IOCTL_OP(IOMMU_VIOMMU_ALLOC, iommufd_viommu_alloc_ioctl,
>> struct iommu_viommu_alloc, out_viommu_id),
>> + IOCTL_OP(IOMMU_HWPT_LU_SET_PRESERVE, iommufd_hwpt_lu_set_preserve,
>> + struct iommu_hwpt_lu_set_preserve, hwpt_token),
>
>Shouldn't struct iommu_hwpt_lu_set_preserve{} be added to union ucmd_buffer{}
>above in this file?

Agreed. Will update.
>