On 15/11/16 13:09, Eric Auger wrote:
> Introduce iommu_get_group_resv_regions whose role consists in
> enumerating all devices from the group and collecting their
> reserved regions. It checks duplicates.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
>
> - we do not move list elements from device to group list since
> the iommu_put_resv_regions() could not be called.
> - at the moment I did not introduce any iommu_put_group_resv_regions
> since it simply consists in voiding/freeing the list
> ---
> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/iommu.h | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> index a4530ad..e0fbcc5 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> @@ -133,6 +133,59 @@ static ssize_t iommu_group_show_name(struct iommu_group *group, char *buf)
> return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", group->name);
> }
>
> +static bool iommu_resv_region_present(struct iommu_resv_region *region,
> + struct list_head *head)
> +{
> + struct iommu_resv_region *entry;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(entry, head, list) {
> + if ((region->start == entry->start) &&
> + (region->length == entry->length) &&
> + (region->prot == entry->prot))
> + return true;
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> +iommu_insert_device_resv_regions(struct list_head *dev_resv_regions,
> + struct list_head *group_resv_regions)
> +{
> + struct iommu_resv_region *entry, *region;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(entry, dev_resv_regions, list) {
> + if (iommu_resv_region_present(entry, group_resv_regions))
> + continue;
In the case of overlapping regions which _aren't_ an exact match, would
it be better to expand the existing one rather than leave the caller to
sort it out? It seems a bit inconsistent to handle only the one case here.
> + region = iommu_alloc_resv_region(entry->start, entry->length,
> + entry->prot);
> + if (!region)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + list_add_tail(®ion->list, group_resv_regions);
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int iommu_get_group_resv_regions(struct iommu_group *group,
> + struct list_head *head)
> +{
> + struct iommu_device *device;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(device, &group->devices, list) {
Should we not be taking the group mutex around this?
Robin.
> + struct list_head dev_resv_regions;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev_resv_regions);
> + iommu_get_resv_regions(device->dev, &dev_resv_regions);
> + ret = iommu_insert_device_resv_regions(&dev_resv_regions, head);
> + iommu_put_resv_regions(device->dev, &dev_resv_regions);
> + if (ret)
> + break;
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_get_group_resv_regions);
> +
> static IOMMU_GROUP_ATTR(name, S_IRUGO, iommu_group_show_name, NULL);
>
> static void iommu_group_release(struct kobject *kobj)
> diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
> index 0aea877..0f7ae2c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/iommu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
> @@ -243,6 +243,8 @@ extern void iommu_set_fault_handler(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> extern int iommu_request_dm_for_dev(struct device *dev);
> extern struct iommu_resv_region *
> iommu_alloc_resv_region(phys_addr_t start, size_t length, unsigned int prot);
> +extern int iommu_get_group_resv_regions(struct iommu_group *group,
> + struct list_head *head);
>
> extern int iommu_attach_group(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> struct iommu_group *group);
> @@ -462,6 +464,12 @@ static inline void iommu_put_resv_regions(struct device *dev,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +static inline int iommu_get_group_resv_regions(struct iommu_group *group,
> + struct list_head *head)
> +{
> + return -ENODEV;
> +}
> +
> static inline int iommu_request_dm_for_dev(struct device *dev)
> {
> return -ENODEV;
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
