Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-183404-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <868a67fa-b5b5-439b-a906-57cdddeb1053@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 11:55:51 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, "iommu@lists.linux.dev"
 <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
 "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org"
 <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/9] iommufd: Fault-capable hwpt attach/detach/replace
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
 Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
 Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
 Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
 Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>, "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
 Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
 Joel Granados <j.granados@samsung.com>
References: <20240430145710.68112-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <20240430145710.68112-7-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <BN9PR11MB5276D582749AD8B619B11B688CEC2@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <bd08d2b0-f226-4b42-8d3b-099c46435aa2@linux.intel.com>
 <BN9PR11MB527642EC35E6B925100D0AEA8CE92@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB527642EC35E6B925100D0AEA8CE92@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 5/20/24 11:35 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2024 10:10 AM
>>
>> On 5/15/24 4:43 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>>> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 10:57 PM
>>>> +
>>>> +int iommufd_fault_domain_replace_dev(struct iommufd_device *idev,
>>>> +				     struct iommufd_hw_pagetable *hwpt,
>>>> +				     struct iommufd_hw_pagetable *old)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct iommu_attach_handle *handle;
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (hwpt->fault)
>>>> +		ret = iommufd_fault_iopf_enable(idev);
>>>> +	else
>>>> +		iommufd_fault_iopf_disable(idev);
>>>> +
>>>> +	ret = iommu_group_replace_domain(idev->igroup->group, hwpt-
>>>>> domain);
>>>> +	if (ret)
>>>> +		goto out_cleanup;
>>>> +
>>>> +	iommufd_auto_response_faults(old, idev);
>>>> +	handle = iommu_attach_handle_get(idev->igroup->group,
>>>> IOMMU_NO_PASID, 0);
>>>> +	handle->idev = idev;
>>>
>>> why is auto response required in replace? new requests can come
>>> after the auto response anyway...
>>>
>>> The user should prepare for faults delivered to the old or new hwpt
>>> in the transition window.
>>
>> The current design of replace allows switching between one that is not
>> IOPF-capable and one that is. This implies that if we switch from an
>> IOPF-capable hwpt to a non-IOPF-capable one, the response queue needs to
>> be auto responded.
>>
> 
> then do it only for that scenario?

Yes. Will do this in the new version.

Best regards,
baolu