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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] vdpa: introduce config op to get valid iova range
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc:     Eli Cohen <eli@mellanox.com>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rob.miller@broadcom.com,
        lingshan.zhu@intel.com, eperezma@redhat.com, lulu@redhat.com,
        shahafs@mellanox.com, hanand@xilinx.com, mhabets@solarflare.com,
        gdawar@xilinx.com, saugatm@xilinx.com, vmireyno@marvell.com,
        zhangweining@ruijie.com.cn
References: <20200617032947.6371-1-jasowang@redhat.com>
 <20200617032947.6371-2-jasowang@redhat.com>
 <20200805085035-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <20200806120354.GA171218@mtl-vdi-166.wap.labs.mlnx>
 <20200806082727-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <20200806124354.GA172661@mtl-vdi-166.wap.labs.mlnx>
 <20200810080410-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <2d1e6278-e57e-c340-399e-40ff102c74a3@redhat.com>
 <20200811042733-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <9effa14f-e305-2fa0-5aa6-83b146b969e0@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:02:26 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200811042733-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 2020/8/11 下午4:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 10:53:09AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 2020/8/10 下午8:05, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:43:54PM +0300, Eli Cohen wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 08:29:22AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:03:55PM +0300, Eli Cohen wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 08:51:56AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:29:44AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>>>>> This patch introduce a config op to get valid iova range from the vDPA
>>>>>>>> device.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang<jasowang@redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>    include/linux/vdpa.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>    1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/vdpa.h b/include/linux/vdpa.h
>>>>>>>> index 239db794357c..b7633ed2500c 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/vdpa.h
>>>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/vdpa.h
>>>>>>>> @@ -41,6 +41,16 @@ struct vdpa_device {
>>>>>>>>    	unsigned int index;
>>>>>>>>    };
>>>>>>>> +/**
>>>>>>>> + * vDPA IOVA range - the IOVA range support by the device
>>>>>>>> + * @start: start of the IOVA range
>>>>>>>> + * @end: end of the IOVA range
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> +struct vdpa_iova_range {
>>>>>>>> +	u64 start;
>>>>>>>> +	u64 end;
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> This is ambiguous. Is end in the range or just behind it?
>>>>>>> How about first/last?
>>>>>> It is customary in the kernel to use start-end where end corresponds to
>>>>>> the byte following the last in the range. See struct vm_area_struct
>>>>>> vm_start and vm_end fields
>>>>> Exactly my point:
>>>>>
>>>>> include/linux/mm_types.h:       unsigned long vm_end;           /* The first byte after our end address
>>>>>
>>>>> in this case Jason wants it to be the last byte, not one behind.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Maybe start, size? Not ambiguous, and you don't need to do annoying
>>>> calculations like size = last - start + 1
>>> Size has a bunch of issues: can overlap, can not cover the entire 64 bit
>>> range. The requisite checks are arguably easier to get wrong than
>>> getting the size if you need it.
>> Yes, so do you still prefer first/last or just begin/end which is consistent
>> with iommu_domain_geometry?
>>
>> Thanks
> I prefer first/last I think, these are unambiguous.
> E.g.
>
>          dma_addr_t aperture_start; /* First address that can be mapped    */
>          dma_addr_t aperture_end;   /* Last address that can be mapped     */
>
> instead of addressing ambiguity with a comment, let's just name the field well.


Ok, will do.

Thanks


>
>
>