Re: [PATCH v12 13/16] iommu: Improve iopf_queue_remove_device()

Baolu Lu
2024-02-07T12:29:52Z

On 2024/2/7 10:50, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:33 AM
>>
>> Convert iopf_queue_remove_device() to return void instead of an error code,
>> as the return value is never used. This removal helper is designed to be
>> never-failed, so there's no need for error handling.
>>
>> Ack all outstanding page requests from the device with the response code of
>> IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_INVALID, indicating device should not attempt any retry.
>>
>> Add comments to this helper explaining the steps involved in removing a
>> device from the iopf queue and disabling its PRI. The individual drivers
>> are expected to be adjusted accordingly. Here we just define the expected
>> behaviors of the individual iommu driver from the core's perspective.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Jason Gunthorpe<jgg@nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe<jgg@nvidia.com>
>> Tested-by: Yan Zhao<yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian<kevin.tian@intel.com>, with one nit:
>
>> + * Removing a device from an iopf_queue. It's recommended to follow
>> these
>> + * steps when removing a device:
>> *
>> - * Return: 0 on success and <0 on error.
>> + * - Disable new PRI reception: Turn off PRI generation in the IOMMU
>> hardware
>> + * and flush any hardware page request queues. This should be done
>> before
>> + * calling into this helper.
>> + * - Acknowledge all outstanding PRQs to the device: Respond to all
>> outstanding
>> + * page requests with IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_INVALID, indicating the device
>> should
>> + * not retry. This helper function handles this.
> this implies calling iopf_queue_remove_device() here.
>
>> + * - Disable PRI on the device: After calling this helper, the caller could
>> + * then disable PRI on the device.
>> + * - Call iopf_queue_remove_device(): Calling iopf_queue_remove_device()
>> + * essentially disassociates the device. The fault_param might still exist,
>> + * but iommu_page_response() will do nothing. The device fault parameter
>> + * reference count has been properly passed from
>> iommu_report_device_fault()
>> + * to the fault handling work, and will eventually be released after
>> + * iommu_page_response().
>> */
> but here it suggests calling iopf_queue_remove_device() again. If the comment
> is just about to detail the behavior with that invocation shouldn't it be merged
> with the previous one instead of pretending to be the final step for driver
> to call?

Above just explains the behavior of calling iopf_queue_remove_device().

Best regards,
baolu