From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74732C2BB55 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 15:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A19120692 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 15:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="PuhKxnCS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727994AbgDIPGR (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2020 11:06:17 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:39544 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727801AbgDIPGR (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2020 11:06:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1586444776; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=W2Ev3/S1C/3a4puTtGn9OVdridbzmbjLhCuT5UsL+Ig=; b=PuhKxnCSaobelSUpOflzo6qXmXjGDpFFzDOrf2ADTYt/MIpxi2+vdKWnJ0eIKsQq1kXal7 YXPuzqq6dX8KEPxLvf9qAiq+zPSoX8Q33p3YGiXsdIsgSLfvSyXdPj9HL7019JNPhlNi1/ feb4sV5JOGTC7VIV3U+RIm/HPT01Jes= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-296-VSi-y48XO9igghdtVzCRuw-1; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 11:06:12 -0400 X-MC-Unique: VSi-y48XO9igghdtVzCRuw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 490928017F5; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 15:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (ovpn-112-54.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.54]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0246C19757; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 15:06:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 17:06:02 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck To: Tony Krowiak Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, freude@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, mjrosato@linux.ibm.com, pmorel@linux.ibm.com, pasic@linux.ibm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, jjherne@linux.ibm.com, fiuczy@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/15] s390/vfio-ap: manage link between queue struct and matrix mdev Message-ID: <20200409170602.4440be0f.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20200407192015.19887-3-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> References: <20200407192015.19887-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> <20200407192015.19887-3-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 15:20:02 -0400 Tony Krowiak wrote: > A vfio_ap_queue structure is created for each queue device probed. To > ensure that the matrix mdev to which a queue's APQN is assigned is linked > to the queue structure as long as the queue device is bound to the vfio_ap > device driver, let's go ahead and manage these links when the queue device > is probed and removed as well as whenever an adapter or domain is assigned > to or unassigned from the matrix mdev. > > Signed-off-by: Tony Krowiak > --- > drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (...) > @@ -536,6 +531,31 @@ static int vfio_ap_mdev_verify_no_sharing(struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev) > return 0; > } > > +/** > + * vfio_ap_mdev_qlinks_for_apid Hm... maybe the function name should express that there's some actual (un)linking going on? vfio_ap_mdev_link_by_apid? Or make this vfio_ap_mdev_link_queues() and pass in an indicator whether the passed value is an apid or an aqid? Both function names look so very similar to be easily confused (at least to me). > + * > + * @matrix_mdev: a matrix mediated device > + * @apqi: the APID of one or more APQNs assigned to @matrix_mdev > + * > + * Set the link to @matrix_mdev for each queue device bound to the vfio_ap > + * device driver with an APQN assigned to @matrix_mdev with the specified @apid. > + * > + * Note: If @matrix_mdev is NULL, the link to @matrix_mdev will be severed. > + */ > +static void vfio_ap_mdev_qlinks_for_apid(struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev, > + unsigned long apid) > +{ > + unsigned long apqi; > + struct vfio_ap_queue *q; > + > + for_each_set_bit_inv(apqi, matrix_mdev->matrix.aqm, > + matrix_mdev->matrix.aqm_max + 1) { > + q = vfio_ap_get_queue(AP_MKQID(apid, apqi)); > + if (q) > + q->matrix_mdev = matrix_mdev; > + } > +} > + > /** > * assign_adapter_store > * (...) > @@ -682,6 +704,31 @@ vfio_ap_mdev_verify_queues_reserved_for_apqi(struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev, > return 0; > } > > +/** > + * vfio_ap_mdev_qlinks_for_apqi See my comment above. > + * > + * @matrix_mdev: a matrix mediated device > + * @apqi: the APQI of one or more APQNs assigned to @matrix_mdev > + * > + * Set the link to @matrix_mdev for each queue device bound to the vfio_ap > + * device driver with an APQN assigned to @matrix_mdev with the specified @apqi. > + * > + * Note: If @matrix_mdev is NULL, the link to @matrix_mdev will be severed. > + */ > +static void vfio_ap_mdev_qlinks_for_apqi(struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev, > + unsigned long apqi) > +{ > + unsigned long apid; > + struct vfio_ap_queue *q; > + > + for_each_set_bit_inv(apid, matrix_mdev->matrix.apm, > + matrix_mdev->matrix.apm_max + 1) { > + q = vfio_ap_get_queue(AP_MKQID(apid, apqi)); > + if (q) > + q->matrix_mdev = matrix_mdev; > + } > +} > + > /** > * assign_domain_store > * (...) > @@ -1270,6 +1319,21 @@ void vfio_ap_mdev_unregister(void) > mdev_unregister_device(&matrix_dev->device); > } > > +static void vfio_ap_mdev_for_queue(struct vfio_ap_queue *q) vfio_ap_queue_link_mdev()? It is the other direction from the linking above. > +{ > + unsigned long apid = AP_QID_CARD(q->apqn); > + unsigned long apqi = AP_QID_QUEUE(q->apqn); > + struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev; > + > + list_for_each_entry(matrix_mdev, &matrix_dev->mdev_list, node) { > + if (test_bit_inv(apid, matrix_mdev->matrix.apm) && > + test_bit_inv(apqi, matrix_mdev->matrix.aqm)) { > + q->matrix_mdev = matrix_mdev; > + break; > + } > + } > +} > + > int vfio_ap_mdev_probe_queue(struct ap_queue *queue) > { > struct vfio_ap_queue *q; > @@ -1282,6 +1346,7 @@ int vfio_ap_mdev_probe_queue(struct ap_queue *queue) > dev_set_drvdata(&queue->ap_dev.device, q); > q->apqn = queue->qid; > q->saved_isc = VFIO_AP_ISC_INVALID; > + vfio_ap_mdev_for_queue(q); > hash_add(matrix_dev->qtable, &q->qnode, q->apqn); > mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock); > In general, looks sane.