From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/6] vfio: remove the unused mdev iommu hook
Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 03:28:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MWHPR11MB1886E02BF7DE371E9665AA328C519@MWHPR11MB1886.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210510155454.GA1096940@ziepe.ca>
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 11:55 PM
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 08:54:02AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The iommu_device field in struct mdev_device has never been used
> > since it was added more than 2 years ago.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 132 ++++++--------------------------
> > include/linux/mdev.h | 20 -----
> > 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 127 deletions(-)
>
> I asked Intel folks to deal with this a month ago:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20210406200030.GA425310@nvidia.com/
>
> So lets just remove it, it is clearly a bad idea
>
> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
>
Want to get a clearer picture on what needs to be redesigned after this
removal.
Are you specially concerned about this iommu_device hack which
directly connects mdev_device to iommu layer or the entire removed
logic including the aux domain concept? For the former we are now
following up the referred thread to find a clean way. But for the latter
we feel it's still necessary regardless of how iommu interface is redesigned
to support device connection from the upper level driver. The reason is
that with mdev or subdevice one physical device could be attached to
multiple domains now. there could be a primary domain with DOMAIN_
DMA type for DMA_API use by parent driver itself, and multiple auxiliary
domains with DOMAIN_UNMANAGED types for subdevices assigned to
different VMs. In this case It's a different model from existing policy
which allows only one domain per device. In removed code we followed
Joerg's suggestion to keep existing iommu_attach_device for connecting
device to the primary domain and then add new iommu_aux_attach_
device for connecting device to auxiliary domains. Lots of removed iommu
code deal with the management of auxiliary domains in the iommu core
layer and intel-iommu drivers, which imho is largely generic and could
be leveraged w/o intrusive refactoring to support redesigned iommu
interface.
Does it sound a reasonable position?
Thanks
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-13 3:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-10 6:53 more iommu dead code removal Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 6:54 ` [PATCH 1/6] iommu: remove the unused dev_has_feat method Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 6:54 ` [PATCH 2/6] iommu: remove the unused iommu_aux_get_pasid interface Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 6:54 ` [PATCH 3/6] vfio: remove the unused mdev iommu hook Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 15:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-13 3:28 ` Tian, Kevin [this message]
2021-05-13 12:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-14 6:27 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-14 6:54 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-14 12:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-14 12:58 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-14 13:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-17 12:22 ` Joerg Roedel
2021-05-17 12:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-17 12:53 ` Joerg Roedel
2021-05-17 13:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-17 15:35 ` Joerg Roedel
2021-05-19 15:23 ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-19 18:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 23:12 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-19 23:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-20 14:13 ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-20 14:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-24 18:18 ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-25 0:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-30 9:08 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-07-22 13:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-07-23 5:36 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-07-23 5:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-07-23 5:44 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-07-22 6:02 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-14 13:17 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-14 13:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-14 14:28 ` Tian, Kevin
2021-05-14 14:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-10 6:54 ` [PATCH 4/6] iommu: remove iommu_aux_{attach,detach}_device Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 6:54 ` [PATCH 5/6] iommu: remove IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_AUX Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 6:54 ` [PATCH 6/6] iommu: remove iommu_dev_feature_enabled Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-10 11:54 ` more iommu dead code removal Jason Gunthorpe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=MWHPR11MB1886E02BF7DE371E9665AA328C519@MWHPR11MB1886.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).