Re: [RFC 07/20] iommu/iommufd: Add iommufd_[un]bind_device()

[David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2346 bytes --]

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 09:43:22AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 01:10:29PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 09:24:57AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 03:25:54PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > +struct iommufd_device {
> > > > > +	unsigned int id;
> > > > > +	struct iommufd_ctx *ictx;
> > > > > +	struct device *dev; /* always be the physical device */
> > > > > +	u64 dev_cookie;
> > > > 
> > > > Why do you need both an 'id' and a 'dev_cookie'?  Since they're both
> > > > unique, couldn't you just use the cookie directly as the index into
> > > > the xarray?
> > > 
> > > ID is the kernel value in the xarray - xarray is much more efficient &
> > > safe with small kernel controlled values.
> > > 
> > > dev_cookie is a user assigned value that may not be unique. It's
> > > purpose is to allow userspace to receive and event and go back to its
> > > structure. Most likely userspace will store a pointer here, but it is
> > > also possible userspace could not use it.
> > > 
> > > It is a pretty normal pattern
> > 
> > Hm, ok.  Could you point me at an example?
> 
> For instance user_data vs fd in io_uring

Ok, but one of those is an fd, which is an existing type of handle.
Here we're introducing two different unique handles that aren't an
existing kernel concept.

> RDMA has many similar examples.
> 
> More or less anytime you want to allow the kernel to async retun some
> information providing a 64 bit user_data lets userspace have an easier
> time to deal with it.

I absolutely see the need for user_data.  What I'm questioning is
having two different, user-visible unique handles, neither of which is
an fd.


That said... is there any strong reason why user_data needs to be
unique?  I can imagine userspace applications where you don't care
which device the notification is coming from - or at least don't care
down to the same granularity that /dev/iommu is using.  In which case
having the kernel provided unique handle and the
not-necessarily-unique user_data would make perfect sense.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]