From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] iommu: Use group ownership to avoid driver attachment
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 10:19:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y+pG9kWzR2c5I9FU@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230213074941.919324-3-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 03:49:39PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> The iommu_group_store_type() requires the devices in the iommu group are
> not bound to any device driver during the whole operation. The existing
> code locks the device with device_lock(dev) and use device_is_bound() to
> check whether any driver is bound to device.
>
> In fact, this can be achieved through the DMA ownership helpers. Replace
> them with iommu_group_claim/release_dma_owner() helpers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 27 +++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> index 4f71dcd2621b..6547cb38480c 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> @@ -2807,12 +2807,6 @@ static int iommu_change_dev_def_domain(struct iommu_group *group,
>
> mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
>
> - if (group->default_domain != group->domain) {
> - dev_err_ratelimited(prev_dev, "Group not assigned to default domain\n");
> - ret = -EBUSY;
> - goto out;
> - }
> -
> /*
> * iommu group wasn't locked while acquiring device lock in
> * iommu_group_store_type(). So, make sure that the device count hasn't
> @@ -2971,6 +2965,7 @@ static void iommu_group_unfreeze_dev_ops(struct iommu_group *group)
> static ssize_t iommu_group_store_type(struct iommu_group *group,
> const char *buf, size_t count)
> {
> + bool group_owner_claimed = false;
> struct group_device *grp_dev;
> struct device *dev;
> int ret, req_type;
> @@ -2992,6 +2987,14 @@ static ssize_t iommu_group_store_type(struct iommu_group *group,
> else
> return -EINVAL;
>
> + if (req_type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA_FQ ||
> + group->default_domain->type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA) {
> + ret = iommu_group_claim_dma_owner(group, (void *)buf);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + group_owner_claimed = true;
> + }
I don't get it, this should be done unconditionally. If we couldn't
take ownership then we simply can't progress.
But there is more to it than that, a device that is owned should not
be release and to achieve this the general logic around the owner
scheme assumes that a driver is attached.
So if you call it from this non-driver context you have to hold the
group_mutex as previously discussed, which also means this needs to be
an externally version of iommu_group_claim_dma_owner()
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-13 14:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-13 7:49 [PATCH 0/4] iommu: Extend changing default domain to normal group Lu Baolu
2023-02-13 7:49 ` [PATCH 1/4] iommu: Add dev_iommu->ops_rwsem Lu Baolu
2023-02-13 14:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-02-15 5:34 ` Baolu Lu
2023-02-15 11:24 ` Robin Murphy
2023-02-16 0:40 ` Baolu Lu
2023-02-13 7:49 ` [PATCH 2/4] iommu: Use group ownership to avoid driver attachment Lu Baolu
2023-02-13 14:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2023-02-15 5:51 ` Baolu Lu
2023-02-15 6:56 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-02-15 7:28 ` Baolu Lu
2023-02-15 11:09 ` Robin Murphy
2023-02-16 0:42 ` Baolu Lu
2023-02-15 12:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-02-16 0:36 ` Baolu Lu
2023-02-13 7:49 ` [PATCH 3/4] iommu: Remove unnecessary device_lock() Lu Baolu
2023-02-13 7:49 ` [PATCH 4/4] iommu: Cleanup iommu_change_dev_def_domain() Lu Baolu
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=Y+pG9kWzR2c5I9FU@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.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