Re: [PATCH v4 10/23] iommufd/viommu: Introduce IOMMUFD_OBJ_HW_QUEUE and its related struct

Nicolin Chen
2025-05-15T17:17:27Z

On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 12:39:03PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 08:02:31PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > +#define iommufd_hw_queue_alloc(viommu, drv_struct, member) \
> > + ({ \
> > + drv_struct *ret; \
> > + \
> > + static_assert(__same_type(struct iommufd_viommu, *viommu)); \
> > + static_assert(__same_type(struct iommufd_hw_queue, \
> > + ((drv_struct *)NULL)->member)); \
> > + static_assert(offsetof(drv_struct, member.obj) == 0); \
> > + ret = (drv_struct *)_iommufd_object_alloc( \
> > + viommu->ictx, sizeof(drv_struct), \
> > + IOMMUFD_OBJ_HW_QUEUE); \
> > + if (!IS_ERR(ret)) { \
> > + ret->member.viommu = viommu; \
> > + ret->member.ictx = viommu->ictx; \
> > + } \
> > + ret; \
> > + })
>
> This should just call
>
> __iommufd_object_alloc(viommu->ictx, ret, IOMMUFD_OBJ_HW_QUEUE member.obj)
>
> And all the casting and asserts should be in that macro, move it to
> this header

Ack.

> > /* Helper for IOMMU driver to destroy structures created by allocators above */
> > #define iommufd_struct_destroy(drv_struct, member) \
> > ({ \
>
> This is abort not destroy, the names should be consistent. But looking
> more at the series I think it will be better to do the little rework I
> suggested and not give this function to the driver in the first place.

Yea, it will be replaced in v5.

Thanks
Nicolin