From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] vfio: Move the sanity check of the group to vfio_create_group()
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 20:12:49 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yyzr8Qizg5BHy5yl@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220922152338.2a2238fe.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 03:23:38PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Well, we don't really need to have this behavior, we could choose to
> implement the first two patches with the caller holding the
> group_lock. Only one of the callers needs the duplicate test, no-iommu
> creates its own iommu_group and therefore cannot have an existing
> device. I think patches 1 & 2 would look like below*, with patch 3
> simply moving the change from vfio_group_get() to refcount_inc() into
> the equivalent place in vfio_group_find_of_alloc(). Thanks,
Yeah, this is nice
I just rebased it onto Kevins series and the reason I did this patch
has evaporated so let me check it again, maybe we don't need it.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-22 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-08 18:44 [PATCH 0/4] Fix splats releated to using the iommu_group after destroying devices Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-08 18:44 ` [PATCH 1/4] vfio: Simplify vfio_create_group() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-20 19:45 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-09-08 18:44 ` [PATCH 2/4] vfio: Move the sanity check of the group to vfio_create_group() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-22 19:10 ` Alex Williamson
2022-09-22 19:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-22 21:23 ` Alex Williamson
2022-09-22 23:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2022-09-08 18:45 ` [PATCH 3/4] vfio: Follow a strict lifetime for struct iommu_group * Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-20 19:32 ` Matthew Rosato
2022-09-08 18:45 ` [PATCH 4/4] iommu: Fix ordering of iommu_release_device() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-08 21:05 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-08 21:27 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-08 21:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 9:05 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-09 13:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 17:57 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-09 18:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 19:55 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-09 23:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-12 11:13 ` Robin Murphy
2022-09-22 16:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-09 12:49 ` [PATCH 0/4] Fix splats releated to using the iommu_group after destroying devices Matthew Rosato
2022-09-09 16:24 ` 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=Yyzr8Qizg5BHy5yl@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--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).