Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] dma-mapping: Introduce dma_iommu_detach_device() API

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2204 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 12:41:52PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 30/04/18 12:02, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 02:11:36PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 08:19:34AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:10:48PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > > From: Thierry Reding <treding-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The dma_iommu_detach_device() API can be used by drivers to forcibly
> > > > > detach a device from an IOMMU that architecture code might have attached
> > > > > to. This is useful for drivers that need explicit control over the IOMMU
> > > > > using the IOMMU API directly.
> > > > 
> > > > Given that no one else implements it making it a generic API seems
> > > > rather confusing.  For now I'd rename it to
> > > > arm_dma_iommu_detach_device() and only implement it in arm.
> > > 
> > > That'd be suboptimal because this code is used on both 32-bit and 64-bit
> > > ARM. If we make the function 32-bit ARM specific then the driver code
> > > would need to use an #ifdef to make sure compilation doesn't break on
> > > 64-bit ARM.
> > 
> > Do you still want me to make this ARM specific? While I haven't
> > encountered this issue on 64-bit ARM yet, I think it would happen there
> > as well, under the right circumstances. I could take a shot at
> > implementing the equivalent there (which means essentially implementing
> > it for drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c and calling that from 64-bit ARM code).
> 
> It sounds like things are getting a bit backwards here: iommu-dma should
> have nothing to do with this, since if you've explicitly attached the device
> to your own IOMMU domain then you're already bypassing everything it knows
> about and has control over. Arch code calling into iommu-dma to do something
> which makes arch code not use iommu-dma makes very little sense.

My understanding is that iommu-dma will set up an IOMMU domain at device
probe time anyway. So even if attaching to an own IOMMU domain will end
up bypassing iommu-dma, we'd still want to clear up the IOMMU domain and
any associated resources, right?

Thierry

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]