On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 3:45 PM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 15:35 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: >>> Add a helper to determine if the dma mappings set up for a given device >>> are backed by an iommu. In particular, this lets code paths know that a >>> dma_unmap operation will revoke access to memory if the device can not >>> otherwise be quiesced. The need for this knowledge is driven by a need >>> to make RDMA transfers to DAX mappings safe. If the DAX file's block map >>> changes we need to be to reliably stop accesses to blocks that have been >>> freed or re-assigned to a new file. >> >> "a dma_unmap operation revoke access to memory"... but it's OK that the >> next *map* will give the same DMA address to someone else, right? > > I'm assuming the next map will be to other physical addresses and a > different requester device since the memory is still registered > exclusively. [ chatted with Ashok ] Yes, it seems we need a way to pin that IOVA as in use, but invalidate it. Then we can wait for the unmap to occur when the memory is unregistered to avoid this IOVA reuse problem.
