Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: v9A73oWHJ7U3Kc97Wo0563K9l+A/HORpuIPJw0J2ivwwmOUYdpxhBuapbiuS4VmJbyAFHAjwL9
 usDf7YuYa8Fg==
IronPort-SDR: eCPijPNfhNoemscwgxRcefwZ2Y8SDR6sV++TqTEKQKEU4t7fpT3657DIOrOonPGx1svabfdC4R
 GFebdUbl5iyQ==
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
To:     Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
CC:     Yi L <yi.l.liu@linux.intel.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v11 05/10] iommu/vt-d: Add bind guest PASID support
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v11 05/10] iommu/vt-d: Add bind guest PASID support
Thread-Index: AQHWCebOp12IiW87IUSByO2zgM/w7qhv6qkAgAJcu4CACNZVgIABkaSw
Date:   Fri, 17 Apr 2020 02:45:22 +0000
Message-ID: <AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D19D824106@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <1585939334-21396-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
 <1585939334-21396-6-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
 <ab57b85b-235f-dc80-1c25-9b3d42dc5f4e@redhat.com>
 <20200410124557.4012b99b@jacob-builder>
 <6d9721a8-2198-5ecd-6c8b-fc43ff2ad7e1@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <6d9721a8-2198-5ecd-6c8b-fc43ff2ad7e1@redhat.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.2.0.6
dlp-reaction: no-action
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> From: Auger Eric
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 6:43 PM
> 
[...]
> >>> +	if (svm) {
> >>> +		/*
> >>> +		 * If we found svm for the PASID, there must be at
> >>> +		 * least one device bond, otherwise svm should be
> >>> freed.
> >>> +		 */
> >>> +		if (WARN_ON(list_empty(&svm->devs))) {
> >>> +			ret = -EINVAL;
> >>> +			goto out;
> >>> +		}
> >>> +
> >>> +		for_each_svm_dev(sdev, svm, dev) {
> >>> +			/* In case of multiple sub-devices of the
> >>> same pdev
> >>> +			 * assigned, we should allow multiple bind
> >>> calls with
> >>> +			 * the same PASID and pdev.
> >>> +			 */
> >>> +			sdev->users++;
> >> What if this is not an mdev device. Is it also allowed?
> > Yes. IOMMU and VT-d driver is not mdev aware. Here mdev is just an
> > example of normal use case. You can bind the same PCI device (PF or
> > SRIOV VF) more than once to the same PASID. Just need to unbind also.
> 
> I don't get the point of binding a non mdev device several times with
> the same PASID. Do you intend to allow that at userspace level or
> prevent this from happening in VFIO?

I feel it's better to prevent this from happening, otherwise VFIO also
needs to track the bind count and do multiple unbinds at mm_exit.
But it's not necessary to prevent it in VFIO. We can check here
upon whether aux_domain is valid, and if not return -EBUSY.

> 
> Besides, the comment is a bit misleading as it gives the impression it
> is only true for mdev and there is no associated check.

Thanks
Kevin