Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 25 May 2022 08:29:49 +0100
From:   Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
To:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Cc:     Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.com>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
        "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
        "Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
        "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/10] iommu/sva: Refactoring
 iommu_sva_bind/unbind_device()
Message-ID: <Yo3a7U9kSaSzagkX@myrica>
References: <20220519072047.2996983-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <20220519072047.2996983-7-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <BN9PR11MB5276E462E3B32DDE54DD66418CD79@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <Yoy6NxroLLZup0sE@myrica>
 <BN9PR11MB5276FF0D52CF82942CB84D608CD69@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB5276FF0D52CF82942CB84D608CD69@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 02:04:49AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 6:58 PM
> > 
> > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 10:22:28AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 3:21 PM
> > > >
> > > > The existing iommu SVA interfaces are implemented by calling the SVA
> > > > specific iommu ops provided by the IOMMU drivers. There's no need for
> > > > any SVA specific ops in iommu_ops vector anymore as we can achieve
> > > > this through the generic attach/detach_dev_pasid domain ops.
> > >
> > > set/block_pasid_dev, to be consistent.
> > >
> > > > +
> > > > +	mutex_lock(&iommu_sva_lock);
> > > > +	/* Search for an existing domain. */
> > > > +	domain = iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid(dev, mm->pasid);
> > > > +	if (domain) {
> > > > +		sva_domain = to_sva_domain(domain);
> > > > +		refcount_inc(&sva_domain->bond.users);
> > > > +		goto out_success;
> > > > +	}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > why would one device/pasid be bound to a mm more than once?
> > 
> > Device drivers can call bind() multiple times for the same device and mm,
> > for example if one process wants to open multiple accelerator queues.
> > 
> 
> Is it clearer to have a sva_bond_get/put() pair instead of calling
> bind() multiple times here? 

I don't think it's clearer, and it would force device drivers to keep
track of {dev, mm} pairs, when the IOMMU subsystem already does that.
At the moment a device driver calls

	bond = iommu_sva_bind_device(dev, mm)

for each ADI that it wants to assign to userspace. If a process happens to
want multiple ADIs on one device, then the {dev, mm} parameters are the
same and bind() returns the same bond. Since the IOMMU driver needs to
track these anyway, it might as well refcount them.

Thanks,
Jean