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, 16 Nov 2022 20:37:11 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Jon Mason <jdmason@kudzu.us>,
        Allen Hubbe <allenbh@gmail.com>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@linutronix.de>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 08/20] genirq/msi: Make MSI descriptor iterators device
 domain aware
Message-ID: <Y3WCN2bAvBvbp/w5@nvidia.com>
References: <20221111131813.914374272@linutronix.de>
 <20221111132706.500733944@linutronix.de>
 <Y3UtlTwIka6n0RuT@nvidia.com>
 <87wn7uo7io.ffs@tglx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87wn7uo7io.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?2uciyCeC7bGEtEebeffdsH/SKf6mI4y3vZCn8OqDop0lQQTb0OLpksbMWywW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?3aEoIXc7uaDh8/JRnzv0ouO4AsmkYvtF8PfAMY3G8u1yZC8Ti6N+yr22phut?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ByZ6F9hawvGJKqKgHeaVlM90l5uymMAfBD0/YfqbLKzRHwJzUEB16sgwEJse?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?WKlmYOtwT1obfMA3wZNU55cCy2ndO+NVOV8Uj0sq7wdQislocTLTIxbSMKvt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?DN9Qfbf9wPvsuMzgtYALkKnNGk7hsKT7L/wzysA+VQx3RgaO8giEAaysw703?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?GlT98c2Vqjl3tauNhsMKcan5LwQt8UlRBBFUxfzOiFhBLnEVTXET+FzG0ABU?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?tQRoFumuXxMugHfnH2gX5CPE9YBsklWLuNGzVhX2DgvIACPUdzQ+ZU1HGA8F?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?V/UNnSvp3BzaoklAhVic6CZElry+9H+aJfQk0/1ynr15SRfW2lid7jwhUf9s?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?dG6n3oxjsTFVJi3DQreZvNIjoXP6HdMt7mWlOZEsAkvZh5lmLvyQbmEoyt7d?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fSLHWOv6F3EdsjqN+p0SSkty9nxiffXlqqs+lcHLJBMQrA3BzKNHYAAhs33S?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?hq65Nky8WSD4CU1mT/l5JS7xeSSpPbSvN4GwJcdsGGgGj8PtgTjFbURptqnz?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?1r/T4fPTX2weW8s2TFK5zdYkULjAN8+dZU/RzUf8CTCFCI8UHhOTiaO0tMU8?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?BqILjSIKbWccu5XkTkipdsFol3GYu1AxTB9VRLzzAAcDLkfoqq127veYU0a+?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?tpw++uI5b6EuSFCJcxhJ06x+3gsncAPwBazuWTpzbz8yQmHkvMBllHU5wZ1y?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?q2SI8N7SDR+8fX0dzb/dgSkkYNUjcFZtuFC/2tK/o7P6DZmg8g6aZ2qsMbIW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Tn905/uVhgO6ZCQlr5LRjHhXXHgvARxXmbwGhN6e8p8ftmB3o27204F0OVLl?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?k+6QNBsp+5k66QkBprUK3aWgbUP7Bb/IUpUcu6mnL2AV6AtiVf/vS/l2UFEf?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fAzNydOD5wazpRUBeNJKYvOsj90cq1A6XkzX2K0uVJKZvGEWaLqvxLItjmQS?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?klS025diuhhtTEimyIY8m70iwmcwTP/dN/7NlpGjMu0O2IfiCwwiT5+1YwWs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?xQWMcmynZq7kaq3xcOT/HwQgGxM3zjoqgJoLCEyooVe3PQ1G5b8VnC8+f2Tz?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?7C71Pt3PaC8qox/NHp1q8rc7JT6V73U/qUz/xYi6BICuYyCfBYAlBBxB91SY?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?qYtebioB1GY/cr/oCqh1I2obw9yNUj/PMZ5CYblibSvQcN1fOIvwMayERWzY?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?r5gwC7dc1o/ErJ5KxsiD8zSTd0XG2tiqpKm7YXy4Pkm5B//MDkl1Wb18XVem?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?FNU+1faywzFXyH/lfcmj4vqXND32TwqbuCXQaQSFHmLtGKX5eo+YkuY0zJmH?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?kvqEZm9D6lScDSuo3XhGpQQJp5rycMifKZYF7y5DhTWKzpK9NO2MzgreMUMX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?cosZXf9GoGxNMh4FxkCZwKYy81KUw/iu820brAvBbCqXwtBM4whIZR+2uNu6?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?v9FVp0FsxxLnWcOEUzU=3D?=
X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 3cd9de73-6821-439f-fa18-08dac833de52
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: LV2PR12MB5869.namprd12.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Nov 2022 00:37:12.6775
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: cLRKBBSDLHU20CWT7ToQCei4YSxRIp1O/IzdnFl9aggEKYetnd7IvgdlYzVU+R3j
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR12MB4287
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_SPF_HELO,
        RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE
        autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 11:32:15PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16 2022 at 14:36, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 02:56:50PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> To support multiple MSI interrupt domains per device it is necessary to
> >> segment the xarray MSI descriptor storage. Each domain gets up to
> >> MSI_MAX_INDEX entries.
> >
> > This kinds of suggests that the new per-device MSI domains should hold
> > this storage instead of per-device xarray?
> 
> No, really not. This would create random storage in random driver places
> instead of having a central storage place which is managed by the core
> code. We've had that back in the days when every architecture had it's
> own magic place to store and manage interrupt descriptors. Seen that,
> mopped it up and never want to go back.

I don't mean shift it into the msi_domain driver logic, I just mean
stick an xarray in the struct msi_domain that the core code, and only
the core code, manages.

But I suppose, on reflection, the strong reason not to do this is that
the msi_descriptor array is per-device, and while it would work OK
with per-device msi_domains we still have the legacy of global msi
domains and thus still need a per-device place to store the global msi
domain's per-device descriptors.

> > At least, I'd like to understand a bit better the motivation for using
> > a domain ID instead of a pointer.
> 
> The main motivation was to avoid device specific storage for the irq
> domain pointers. It would have started with PCI/MSI[X]: I'd had to add a
> irqdomain pointer to struct pci_dev and then have the PCI core care
> about it. So we'd add that to everything and the world which utilizes
> per device MSI domains which is quite a few places outside of PCI in the
> ARM64 world and growing.

I was thinking more that the "default" domain (eg the domain ID 0 as
this series has it) would remain as a domain pointer in the device
data as it is here, but any secondary domains would be handled with a
pointer that the driver owns.

You could have as many secondary domains as is required this way. Few
drivers would ever use a secondary domain, so it not really a big deal
for them to hold the pointer lifetime.

> So what are you concerned about?

Mostly API clarity, I find it very un-kernly to swap a clear pointer
for an ID #. We loose typing, the APIs become less clear and we now
have to worry about ID allocation policy if we ever need more than 2.

Thanks,
Jason