public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@linux.ibm.com>,
	Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
	Gerd Bayer <gbayer@linux.ibm.com>,
	Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com,
	gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com, agordeev@linux.ibm.com,
	svens@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Julian Ruess <julianr@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] iommu/dma: Allow a single FQ in addition to per-CPU FQs
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:57:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8209c172aaa415eace9dcd4b5675ef8506a34538.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y9ficPosWtGqbDit@nvidia.com>

On Mon, 2023-01-30 at 11:29 -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 03:13:22PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> 
> > Either way, the more I think about this the more I'm starting to agree that
> > adding more domain types for iommu-dma policy is a step in the wrong
> > direction. If I may, I'd like to fall back on the "or at least some definite
> > internal flag" part of my original suggestion :)
> 
> Yes please, lets try to remove IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA, not add more :)
> 
> At this point we should probably just sort of hackily add a ops flag
> to indicate single queue and when we fixup the policy logic we can
> make it a user selectable policy as well.
> 
> Jason

Ok yeah I did like the policy idea you brought up a while back. If we
want to do the conversion to dma-iommu before that we do need an
interim solution though. So if I'm reading your ops flag idea right I
think it could even re-use much of the logic in this series and just
not introduce a new domain type.

I'm wondering if maybe instead of plain flag bits it makes more sense
to have a dma_iommu_options struct that contains the queue size and a
flags value which indicates whether a single or per-CPU queue is used.
Then I could add an iommu_ops callback that takes a device and a
pointer to the dma_iommu_options. That way we can still set the options
per device but don't need a whole extra domain type. This callback
would then just be called during initialization of the DMA-FQ domain
and not having the callback just leaves the defaults unchanged. Does
that go in the right direction?

Thanks,
Niklas

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-30 15:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-24 12:50 [PATCH v5 0/7] iommu/dma: s390 DMA API conversion and optimized IOTLB flushing Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] s390/ism: Set DMA coherent mask Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] iommu: Allow .iotlb_sync_map to fail and handle s390's -ENOMEM return Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] s390/pci: prepare is_passed_through() for dma-iommu Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] s390/pci: Use dma-iommu layer Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] iommu/dma: Allow a single FQ in addition to per-CPU FQs Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-30 15:13   ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-30 15:29     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-30 15:57       ` Niklas Schnelle [this message]
2023-01-30 16:40         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-30 15:36     ` Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] iommu/dma: Enable variable queue size and use larger single queue Niklas Schnelle
2023-01-24 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] iommu/dma: Add IOMMU op to choose lazy domain type Niklas Schnelle

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=8209c172aaa415eace9dcd4b5675ef8506a34538.camel@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gbayer@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=julianr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=wenjia@linux.ibm.com \
    --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