Re: [PATCH v9 10/11] iommu: Per-domain I/O page fault handling

From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com,
	Ethan Zhao <haifeng.zhao@linux.intel.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
	Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
	Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 10/11] iommu: Per-domain I/O page fault handling
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 08:24:49 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf2ae213-b938-2550-b367-f548fc755e99@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrsOO9E+j+CMgKMA@myrica>

On 2022/6/28 22:20, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:53:39PM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
>>>>> Once the iopf_handle_single() is removed, the name of
>>>>> iopf_handle_group() looks a little weired
>>>>>
>>>>> and confused, does this group mean the iommu group (domain) ?
>>>>> while I take some minutes to
>>>>
>>>> No. This is not the iommu group. It's page request group defined by the
>>>> PCI SIG spec. Multiple page requests could be put in a group with a
>>>> same group id. All page requests in a group could be responded to device
>>>> in one shot.
>>>
>>> Thanks your explaination, understand the concept of PCIe PRG.  I meant
>>>
>>> do we still have the necessity to mention the "group" here in the name
>>>
>>> iopf_handle_group(),  which one is better ? iopf_handle_prg() or
>>>
>>> iopf_handler(),  perhaps none of them ? :)
>>
>> Oh! Sorry for the misunderstanding.
>>
>> I have no strong feeling to change this naming. :-) All the names
>> express what the helper does. Jean is the author of this framework. If
>> he has the same idea as you, I don't mind renaming it in this patch.
> 
> I'm not attached to the name, and I see how it could be confusing. Given
> that io-pgfault is not only for PCIe, 'prg' is not the best here either.
> iopf_handle_faults(), or just iopf_handler(), seem more suitable.

Okay, so I will rename it to iopf_handle_faults() in this patch.

Best regards,
baolu