From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14C6A2701C3; Thu, 24 Apr 2025 01:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745458839; cv=none; b=anAR4Q+6B5aWIMnXlcN/ZhtJ+faK5MPMMAjkOYwPmiJZwimOyR1VlSQZtVrY2HoCeBQdNCBs/M8lQTkF6EJ7RQEwcyN8SxzUlunBjzVtWUAP5nw8v0oXoIeZdMmdw++KcksvXUruT6zVMnzWBi2hArfnlPRmDotRTddZgbMK2mI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745458839; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GxcZbzXAsyopNmam3IbbTcoy0AzAFCempRRT2l3+OW8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Ga8FgmgI9ESAEdtDEd7RHOM2YMwvcQqhzHbssvTp3ZJKo50/YwwFmvjXNWTBsN4o/PjBVGt+tLLmlFazIJs2LiH/ffT47g8vTZjHhAEr8j4+fVM7PopHOmNgkELjxAaMlCtPy6pJI4ku9smo9jcshku+fu/2FBPA8QbCaqQblbE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=GdJSl9zL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="GdJSl9zL" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1745458838; x=1776994838; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GxcZbzXAsyopNmam3IbbTcoy0AzAFCempRRT2l3+OW8=; b=GdJSl9zLlzecN3enylysJHdd7d+K52ZttbogMYO1hN9q5JCXp6slzzEl c9bjQSP0vLSg0J2bslth1TD02nWJhJl4QGdtM/7/BVyE5EunZ27DVRIpT 3Dn4VIPhA0tTQQYQUIAbC8oXuoElh4fuF8hrHrVDvvK/jCawTAArAJvuk zru8mhdNAAtz/1SP20ELvaqPiO3eSWLLZH3K7evTREVAKWAn25tUQRm6h GdAVT9XzudwddSDEaI8GHqCtEgN22K1But/EJCpXnndhZ7UX/m4/fdLKc AxFD0bwB0qkxgEkBFiUhbSGqTE/YbAW/3bGfUGtxz51AY5AHEJCuIZi/Y w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: TjuD8FZkRJGgQRyM2n8/1w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: UjpVXT5hTa2fX+ZPwKLBPw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11412"; a="57718078" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,233,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="57718078" Received: from orviesa007.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.147]) by fmvoesa103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Apr 2025 18:40:37 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 6+oKY1WXSyKUROLt/jVNnw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: krdCVcNfT4+8MsuMpGylSg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,233,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="132999771" Received: from allen-sbox.sh.intel.com (HELO [10.239.159.30]) ([10.239.159.30]) by orviesa007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Apr 2025 18:40:35 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 09:36:19 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] iommu: Allow attaching static domains in iommu_attach_device_pasid() To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Joerg Roedel , Will Deacon , Robin Murphy , Kevin Tian , shangsong2@lenovo.com, Dave Jiang , iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org References: <20250423021839.2189204-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> <20250423142102.GL1648741@nvidia.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Baolu Lu In-Reply-To: <20250423142102.GL1648741@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 4/23/25 22:21, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 10:18:39AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: >> @@ -3435,7 +3448,8 @@ int iommu_attach_device_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain, >> !ops->blocked_domain->ops->set_dev_pasid) >> return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> >> - if (ops != domain->owner || pasid == IOMMU_NO_PASID) >> + if (!domain_iommu_ops_compatible(ops, domain) || >> + pasid == IOMMU_NO_PASID) >> return -EINVAL; > Convert all the places checking domain->owner to the new function.. > > static int __iommu_attach_group(struct iommu_domain *domain, > struct iommu_group *group) > > int iommu_replace_device_pasid(struct iommu_domain *domain, > struct device *dev, ioasid_t pasid, > struct iommu_attach_handle *handle) Sure. Will make it in a new version. Thanks, baolu