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;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.117.160 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.117.160; helo=mail.nvidia.com; pr=C
Date:   Fri, 24 Mar 2023 10:55:27 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
CC:     Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        <will@kernel.org>, <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
        <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
        <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>, <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 12/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Support IOMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED
 type of allocations
Message-ID: <ZB3kD//ugNBy4En7@Asurada-Nvidia>
References: <cover.1678348754.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com>
 <b01b2bad6d0d34908812d964eba118a9cc1e89ab.1678348754.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com>
 <b870ec68-623c-df0c-3ea5-7fe6a95e2ef6@redhat.com>
 <ZB3i6r7QD4NVBXkK@Asurada-Nvidia>
 <ZB3jMSOL5A+E5D82@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZB3jMSOL5A+E5D82@nvidia.com>
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Mar 2023 17:55:42.5094
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7b2eeeb9-9030-4a29-547f-08db2c90fc84
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.117.160];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DS1PEPF0000E62F.namprd02.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CH0PR12MB5091
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=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=unavailable 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 Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 02:51:45PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 10:50:34AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 04:44:58PM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
> > > > @@ -2923,8 +2949,16 @@ arm_smmu_domain_alloc_user(struct device *dev, struct iommu_domain *parent,
> > > >       const struct iommu_hwpt_arm_smmuv3 *user_cfg = user_data;
> > > >       struct arm_smmu_master *master = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> > > >       unsigned type = IOMMU_DOMAIN_UNMANAGED;
> > > > +     struct arm_smmu_domain *s2 = NULL;
> > > > +
> > > > +     if (parent) {
> > > > +             if (parent->ops != arm_smmu_ops.default_domain_ops)
> > > > +                     return NULL;
> > > > +             type = IOMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED;
> > > > +             s2 = to_smmu_domain(parent);
> > > > +     }
> > > Please can you explain the (use) case where !parent. This creates an
> > > unmanaged S1?
> > 
> > It creates an unmanaged type of a domain. The decision to mark
> > it as an unmanaged S1 or an unmanaged S2 domain, is done in the
> > finalise() function that it checks the S2 flag and set a stage
> > accordingly.
> 
> This also needs to be fixed up, the alloc_user should not return
> incompletely initialized domains.

The finalise() is called at the end of __arm_smmu_domain_alloc()
so alloc_user passing a dev pointer completes the initialization
actually.

Thanks
Nicolin