> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2023 5:13 AM
>
> > > + if (!iommufd_hw_pagetable_has_group(hwpt, idev->group)) {
> > > + if (list_empty(&hwpt->devices)) {
> > > + iopt_table_remove_domain(&hwpt->ioas->iopt,
> > > + hwpt->domain);
> > > + list_del(&hwpt->hwpt_item);
> > > + }
> >
> > I'm not sure how this can be fully shared between detach and replace.
> > Here some work e.g. above needs to be done before calling
> > iommu_group_replace_domain() while others can be done afterwards.
>
> This iopt_table_remove_domain/list_del is supposed to be done in
> the hwpt's destroy() actually. We couldn't move it because it'd
> need the new domain_alloc_user op and its implementation in ARM
> driver. Overall, I think it should be safe to put it behind the
> iommu_group_replace_domain().
>
My confusion is that we have different flows between detach/attach
and replace.
today with separate detach+attach we have following flow:
Remove device from current hwpt;
if (last_device in hwpt) {
Remove hwpt domain from current iopt;
if (last_device in group)
detach group from hwpt domain;
}
if (first device in group) {
attach group to new hwpt domain;
if (first_device in hwpt)
Add hwpt domain to new iopt;
Add device to new hwpt;
but replace flow is different on the detach part:
if (first device in group) {
replace group's domain from current hwpt to new hwpt;
if (first_device in hwpt)
Add hwpt domain to new iopt;
}
Remove device from old hwpt;
if (last_device in old hwpt)
Remove hwpt domain from old iopt;
Add device to new hwpt;
I'm yet to figure out whether we have sufficient lock protection to
prevent other paths from using old iopt/hwpt to find the device
which is already attached to a different domain.
