On 2023/8/3 23:18, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 12:44:03AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Jason Gunthorpe<jgg@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 10:16 PM
On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 02:31:23PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
The PCI PASID enabling interface guarantees that the address space used
by each PASID is unique. This is achieved by checking that the PCI ACS
path is enabled for the device. If the path is not enabled, then the
PASID feature cannot be used.
if (!pci_acs_path_enabled(pdev, NULL, PCI_ACS_RR | PCI_ACS_UF))
return -EINVAL;
The PASID array is not an attribute of the IOMMU group. It is more
natural to store the PASID array in the per-device IOMMU data. This
makes the code clearer and easier to understand. No functional changes
are intended.
Is there a reason to do this?
*PCI* requires the ACS/etc because PCI kind of messed up how switches
handled PASID so PASID doesn't work otherwise.
But there is nothing that says other bus type can't have working
(non-PCI) PASID and still have device isolation issues.
So unless there is a really strong reason to do this we should keep
the PASID list in the group just like the domain.
this comes from the consensus in [1].
[1]https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/ZAcyEzN4102gPsWC@xxxxxxxxxx/
That consensus was that we don't have PASID support if there is
multi-device groups, at least in iommufd.. That makes sense. If we
want to change the core code to enforce this that also makes sense
In my initial plan, I had a third patch that would have enforced single-
device groups for PASID interfaces in the core. But I ultimately dropped
it because it is the fact for PCI devices, but I am not sure about other
buses although perhaps there is none.
But this series is just moving the array?
So I took the first step by moving the pasid_array from iommu group to
the device. :-)
Best regards,
baolu
