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;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc:     "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@vger.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>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Jon Mason <jdmason@kudzu.us>,
        Allen Hubbe <allenbh@gmail.com>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@linutronix.de>,
        "Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [patch 12/20] genirq/msi: Make descriptor freeing domain aware
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB52762A0081F7A1679850142A8C099@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20221111131813.914374272@linutronix.de>
 <20221111132706.726275059@linutronix.de>
 <BN9PR11MB52762A0081F7A1679850142A8C099@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2022 13:22:34 +0100
Message-ID: <87leo8jvud.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 18 2022 at 08:17, Kevin Tian wrote:
>> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>  /**
>> - * msi_insert_msi_desc - Allocate and initialize a MSI descriptor in the
>> default domain
>> + * msi_insert_msi_desc - Allocate and initialize a MSI descriptor in the
>> default irqdomain
>> + *
>
> belong to last patch

Yes.

>> +/**
>> + * struct msi_ctrl - MSI internal management control structure
>> + * @domid:	ID of the domain on which management operations should
>> be done
>> + * @first:	First (hardware) slot index to operate on
>> + * @last:	Last (hardware) slot index to operate on
>> + */
>> +struct msi_ctrl {
>> +	unsigned int			domid;
>> +	unsigned int			first;
>> +	unsigned int			last;
>> +};
>> +
>
> this really contains the range information. what about msi_range and
> then msi_range_valid()?

It's range plus domain id and later it gains nirqs. So its awkward in
any case.

>> +static void msi_domain_free_descs(struct device *dev, struct msi_ctrl *ctrl)
>>  {
>>  	struct xarray *xa = &dev->msi.data->__store;
>>  	struct msi_desc *desc;
>>  	unsigned long idx;
>> +	int base;
>> +
>> +	lockdep_assert_held(&dev->msi.data->mutex);
>> 
>> -	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(first_index >= MSI_MAX_INDEX || last_index >=
>> MSI_MAX_INDEX))
>> +	if (!msi_ctrl_valid(dev, ctrl))
>>  		return;
>> 
>> -	lockdep_assert_held(&dev->msi.data->mutex);
>> +	base = msi_get_domain_base_index(dev, ctrl->domid);
>> +	if (base < 0)
>> +		return;
>
> What about putting domid checks in msi_ctrl_valid() then here could
> be a simple calculation on domid * MSI_XA_DOMAIN_SIZE.
>
> domid is part of msi_ctrl. then it sound reasonable to validate it
> together with first/last.

Let me look at that.