On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:43:23AM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
> On 5/15/23 10:00 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > void iommufd_device_destroy(struct iommufd_object *obj)
> > {
> > struct iommufd_device *idev =
> > container_of(obj, struct iommufd_device, obj);
> > iommu_device_release_dma_owner(idev->dev);
> > - iommu_group_put(idev->group);
> > + iommufd_put_group(idev->igroup);
> > if (!iommufd_selftest_is_mock_dev(idev->dev))
> > iommufd_ctx_put(idev->ictx);
> > }
> > @@ -46,7 +154,7 @@ struct iommufd_device *iommufd_device_bind(struct iommufd_ctx *ictx,
> > struct device *dev, u32 *id)
> > {
> > struct iommufd_device *idev;
> > - struct iommu_group *group;
> > + struct iommufd_group *igroup;
> > int rc;
> > /*
> > @@ -56,9 +164,9 @@ struct iommufd_device *iommufd_device_bind(struct iommufd_ctx *ictx,
> > if (!device_iommu_capable(dev, IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY))
> > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > - group = iommu_group_get(dev);
> > - if (!group)
> > - return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> > + igroup = iommufd_get_group(ictx, dev);
> > + if (IS_ERR(igroup))
> > + return ERR_CAST(igroup);
> > /*
> > * For historical compat with VFIO the insecure interrupt path is
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Perhaps I am asking a silly question. The iommufd_group is get in
> iommufd_device_bind(), but put in iommufd_device_destroy(). Why not put
> it in iommufd_device_unbind()?
It basically is like that, iommufd_device_destroy() is a helper that
is only called by iommufd_device_unbind() through the usual
destruction mechanism.
Jason
