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;
Message-ID: <c815fa2b-00df-91e1-8353-8258773957e4@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Jul 2023 10:43:46 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Cc:     baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
        "iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] iommu: Make fault_param generic
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
        Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
References: <20230711010642.19707-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <20230711010642.19707-6-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <BN9PR11MB52763F7A1433C73CF6589F2E8C31A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB52763F7A1433C73CF6589F2E8C31A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2023/7/11 14:14, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2023 9:07 AM
>>
>> @@ -299,7 +299,15 @@ static int dev_iommu_get(struct device *dev)
>>   		return -ENOMEM;
>>
>>   	mutex_init(&param->lock);
>> +	param->fault_param = kzalloc(sizeof(*param->fault_param),
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!param->fault_param) {
>> +		kfree(param);
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +	}
>> +	mutex_init(&param->fault_param->lock);
>> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&param->fault_param->faults);
>>   	dev->iommu = param;
>> +
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
> 
> Upon above changes is it slightly cleaner to call it dev_iommu_init()
> to better pair with dev_iommu_free()?

dev_iommu_init() was introduced in Jason's series. It's not landed yet.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/0-v3-328044aa278c+45e49-iommu_probe_jgg@nvidia.com/

Sure. Should refine this code after above patches are landed.

Best regards,
baolu