On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 11:31:54AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 04:30:35PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > This is a reverse search v.s. iommufd_viommu_find_dev, as drivers may want
> > to convert a struct device pointer (physical) to its virtual device ID for
> > an event injection to the user space VM.
> >
> > Again, this avoids exposing more core structures to the drivers, than the
> > iommufd_viommu alone.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/iommufd.h | 9 +++++++++
> > drivers/iommu/iommufd/driver.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
>
> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > + xa_lock(&viommu->vdevs);
> > + xa_for_each(&viommu->vdevs, index, vdev) {
> > + if (vdev->dev == dev) {
> > + *vdev_id = (unsigned long)vdev->id;
>
> I don't think we need this cast
The left side is ulong for xarray index, while the right side is
__aligned_u64 for uAPI. Could there be a gcc warning when somebody
builds the kernel having a BITS_PER_LONG=32?
iommufd_vdevice_alloc_ioctl() does test vdev->id against ULONG_MAX
though..
Thanks
Nicolin
