From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73B4FC433E6 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 01:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 488B764EC3 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 01:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1353217AbhCDBDI (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:03:08 -0500 Received: from hqnvemgate26.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.65]:16851 "EHLO hqnvemgate26.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1385319AbhCDAYr (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:24:47 -0500 Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqnvemgate26.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, AES256-SHA) id ; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:24:04 -0800 Received: from HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) by HQMAIL109.nvidia.com (172.20.187.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 00:24:03 +0000 Received: from HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) by HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 00:24:01 +0000 Received: from NAM12-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.59.175) by HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 00:24:01 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=IC/YMgwRwCj+g0AQ/ccOrHyQx+tFwXw8tlJQ8202xjfgo4/pFAxkgnanZqldWT6FoGjcpece26SkQUAysYxnsM1EUGUb/hLGvJWKtvAh9HMf8ASIV5/T3AAhSSngebbMDPXvVxXyBduy5X5cEubj09V2e7FU0i2gBr67xrC0lWqEyBI7LBVI4+osA94Pabc9T8B8qfpnwvcrvKAyy8C8rb7A4E1GQwkoJev6vtvbkhLZiGg+vQWJjpM4TedHTwbd4gwPCTGwAj/mUuKagVzoUJXlh402g621bIAlT4HvFyvL9doNjr6sHoEjzaWMbocfT6Oas5+wLEYHWEPyrYMUZg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=aIwvvpE4wGoBAdK1+JiL6a3DRIITWKYkTYWOnUwBXbw=; b=cu/A7RwNZq1If5+l3S3xw1fS9qVbFqEPm7o3kybtRoAPDhQy5S3wWlk4QY7CW4/BV/Q/u2W4VD172xbwFuN99P3LCbs/Ghl3iUc+UvKC8kXpFZyoiYVa6U9csSrVPtyXM1xwpIjhBrDz7BnMpRrIjUaLBdsSfqhY8+vOzz8NFj0BSuYEWUMLRsEyZZ3LlFplk4ZZebkoXlBEwHElXrPDt0/nf5IO3rt0G5QWslKrmN41qVyYuS4Wp/sRp06ihSMLB+ef2mgvGNeGN4BRvvWC39niNFO1BkrOgG0GAx2T+ZbR+ufW6PMKEu29xMxiN6QWQd6b4gU2Ck5/DP61q5bt1A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nvidia.com; arc=none Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) by DM6PR12MB4498.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:2a2::17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3890.19; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 00:23:58 +0000 Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c62:7fa3:617b:ab87]) by DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c62:7fa3:617b:ab87%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3912.017; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 00:23:58 +0000 Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:23:57 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Jacob Pan CC: Tejun Heo , LKML , "Joerg Roedel" , Lu Baolu , "David Woodhouse" , , , Johannes Weiner , Jean-Philippe Brucker , Alex Williamson , Eric Auger , "Jonathan Corbet" , Raj Ashok , "Tian, Kevin" , Yi Liu , Wu Hao , Dave Jiang Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 15/18] cgroup: Introduce ioasids controller Message-ID: <20210304002357.GY4247@nvidia.com> References: <1614463286-97618-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1614463286-97618-16-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <20210303131726.7a8cb169@jacob-builder> <20210303160205.151d114e@jacob-builder> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210303160205.151d114e@jacob-builder> X-ClientProxiedBy: BL1PR13CA0095.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:2b9::10) To DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from mlx.ziepe.ca (142.162.115.133) by BL1PR13CA0095.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:2b9::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3933.16 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 00:23:58 +0000 Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lHbmX-006O4j-FM; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 20:23:57 -0400 X-Header: ProcessedBy-CMR-outbound DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1614817444; bh=aIwvvpE4wGoBAdK1+JiL6a3DRIITWKYkTYWOnUwBXbw=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType:X-Header; b=C3fjXaTiJBKO1GYRDJrCCxB7V2sCABjNAU8GwkVL7OgiP2eaQQhwz77qemjqv2HWG Ur0ALQQj7VoRWcK74JUXIAo6+w0CUQ2u7PuU9l8jvnXVeaxsaHVpuaPCrjjM4R1043 QNxly8dOmrEdVq7/0RAaTXgjlA1cBCIqoiugq07vYKnuQ8YkPJZQtVFihRibWUvyQX sG7mW0uDkK3pgJouCW4jfadroRjQvwWwZr5oe10GAXxw63aopaVF0YCsKuumeLEyx3 UmYjK/zIitVVODJ0TossHZvjZq3g3/chw/RpLRUQnVTSwaV6tqQdk5D1PTwhz6ezUN QRd1sctf32nvg== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 04:02:05PM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote: > > The interface definitely can be reused. But IOASID has a different > > behavior in terms of migration and ownership checking. I guess SEV key > > IDs are not tied to a process whereas IOASIDs are. Perhaps this can be > > solved by adding > > + .can_attach = ioasids_can_attach, > > + .cancel_attach = ioasids_cancel_attach, > > Let me give it a try and come back. > > > While I am trying to fit the IOASIDs cgroup in to the misc cgroup proposal. > I'd like to have a direction check on whether this idea of using cgroup for > IOASID/PASID resource management is viable. > > Alex/Jason/Jean and everyone, your feedback is much appreciated. IMHO I can't think of anything else to enforce some limit on a HW scarce resource that unpriv userspace can consume. Jason