Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-177134-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
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: Sun, 12 May 2024 20:44:30 -0700
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
CC: <will@kernel.org>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>, <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	<suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, <joro@8bytes.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
	<yi.l.liu@intel.com>, <eric.auger@redhat.com>, <vasant.hegde@amd.com>,
	<jon.grimm@amd.com>, <santosh.shukla@amd.com>, <Dhaval.Giani@amd.com>,
	<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv1 02/14] iommufd: Swap _iommufd_object_alloc and
 __iommufd_object_alloc
Message-ID: <ZkGMnuBJKseFHfp4@nvidia.com>
References: <cover.1712978212.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com>
 <43bab81816a7bb08fde868a43d62c439ede91f9f.1712978212.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com>
 <ZkDDlMouOmfTaRRg@nvidia.com>
 <ZkF7EY+COAPYNWwU@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZkF7EY+COAPYNWwU@nvidia.com>
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2024 03:44:46.3724
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 219d48f1-32b8-4789-9da9-08dc72ff0891
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:
	BN3PEPF0000B06B.namprd21.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM4PR12MB7744

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 07:29:54PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 10:26:44AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 08:46:59PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > Currently, the object allocation function calls:
> > > level-0: iommufd_object_alloc()
> > > level-1:     ___iommufd_object_alloc()
> > > level-2:         _iommufd_object_alloc()
> > 
> > Let's give __iommufd_object_alloc() a better name then
> > 
> > It is a less general version of iommufd_object_alloc(), maybe
> > iommufd_object_alloc_elm() ?
> 
> With the level-3 allocator, something like the followings?
> 
> level-0: iommufd_object_alloc()
> level-1:     __iommufd_object_alloc()
> level-2:         iommufd_object_alloc_elm()
> level-3:             __iommufd_object_alloc_elm()
> 
> In this case, this patch will be:
> "iommufd: Rename _iommufd_object_alloc to iommufd_object_alloc_elm"

After reading your comments in PATCH-4, seems that we don't need
the level-3 allocator, if we pass an ictx pointer throughout the
core and driver. I will try with this first.

Thanks
Nicolin