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:   Thu, 4 May 2023 14:39:05 -0700
From:   Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
To:     Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        "dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
        "vkoul@kernel.org" <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi@intel.com>,
        "Ranganathan, Narayan" <narayan.ranganathan@intel.com>,
        jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] iommu/vt-d: Factoring out PASID set up helper
 function
Message-ID: <20230504143905.66fd14c7@jacob-builder>
In-Reply-To: <9fb1c0dd-ea78-a3f7-9eac-3154f5d08ad5@linux.intel.com>
References: <20230427174937.471668-1-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
        <20230427174937.471668-5-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
        <BN9PR11MB5276726E67301703BD10833B8C6B9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
        <9fb1c0dd-ea78-a3f7-9eac-3154f5d08ad5@linux.intel.com>
Organization: OTC
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Baolu,

On Wed, 3 May 2023 14:37:16 +0800, Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
wrote:

> On 4/28/23 5:47 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >> From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2023 1:50 AM
> >>
> >>
> >> +static int dmar_domain_attach_device_pasid(struct dmar_domain *domain,
> >> +					   struct intel_iommu *iommu,
> >> +					   struct device *dev,
> >> ioasid_t pasid) +{
> >> +	int ret;
> >> +
> >> +	/* PASID table is mandatory for a PCI device in scalable
> >> mode. */
> >> +	if (!sm_supported(iommu) && dev_is_real_dma_subdevice(dev))
> >> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;  
> > 
> > "&&" should be "||"
> >   
> 
> Also should return success instead if this is a RID case. Perhaps,
> 
> 	if (!sm_supported(iommu) || dev_is_real_dma_subdevice(dev))
> 		return pasid == RID2PASID ? 0 : -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 
Yeah,  I think this is better.  will do.

I was hoping not to treat RIDPASID special here. The caller of this
function does the check if that is RIDPASID but code is duplicated.

Thanks,

Jacob