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: YbTWwSOBbZVsDosE0wgD8Tz2wwMRLVGJvLcHijLsoJWpmPIlcRr4adhSgbZufiV2pMokqHfKC3
 YLmIKflH0gHg==
IronPort-SDR: 9/26xGdp6Lz9x66jJdkf3SzA1PYii11BJIvKVB0+a/56W0qSgeYjSmdylmkMihaKUpOfvXuquH
 x+Vy+yi2JzkQ==
Cc:     baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, yi.l.liu@intel.com,
        "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@redhat.com)\"\"" 
        <alex.williamson@redhat.com>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@linux.intel.com>
References: <MWHPR11MB1886422D4839B372C6AB245F8C239@MWHPR11MB1886.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <f510f916-e91c-236d-e938-513a5992d3b5@redhat.com>
 <20210531164118.265789ee@yiliu-dev>
 <78ee2638-1a03-fcc8-50a5-81040f677e69@redhat.com>
 <20210601113152.6d09e47b@yiliu-dev>
 <164ee532-17b0-e180-81d3-12d49b82ac9f@redhat.com>
From:   Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <64898584-a482-e6ac-fd71-23549368c508@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:23:07 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <164ee532-17b0-e180-81d3-12d49b82ac9f@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Jason W,

On 6/1/21 1:08 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> 2) If yes, what's the reason for not simply use the fd opened from
>>> /dev/ioas. (This is the question that is not answered) and what happens
>>> if we call GET_INFO for the ioasid_fd?
>>> 3) If not, how GET_INFO work?
>> oh, missed this question in prior reply. Personally, no special reason
>> yet. But using ID may give us opportunity to customize the management
>> of the handle. For one, better lookup efficiency by using xarray to
>> store the allocated IDs. For two, could categorize the allocated IDs
>> (parent or nested). GET_INFO just works with an input FD and an ID.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure I get this, for nesting cases you can still make the child 
> an fd.
> 
> And a question still, under what case we need to create multiple ioasids 
> on a single ioasid fd?

One possible situation where multiple IOASIDs per FD could be used is
that devices with different underlying IOMMU capabilities are sharing a
single FD. In this case, only devices with consistent underlying IOMMU
capabilities could be put in an IOASID and multiple IOASIDs per FD could
be applied.

Though, I still not sure about "multiple IOASID per-FD" vs "multiple
IOASID FDs" for such case.

Best regards,
baolu