> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 6:41 AM
>
> > ...
> > > - if (resv_msi) {
> > > + if (resv_msi && !domain->msi_cookie) {
> > > ret = iommu_get_msi_cookie(domain->domain,
> > > resv_msi_base);
> > > if (ret && ret != -ENODEV)
> > > goto out_detach;
> > > + domain->msi_cookie = true;
> > > }
> >
> > why not moving to alloc_attach_domain() then no need for the new
> > domain field? It's required only when a new domain is allocated.
>
> When reusing an existing domain that doesn't have an msi_cookie,
> we can do iommu_get_msi_cookie() if resv_msi is found. So it is
> not limited to a new domain.
Looks msi_cookie requirement is per platform (currently only
for smmu. see arm_smmu_get_resv_regions()). If there is
no mixed case then above check is not required.
But let's hear whether Robin has a different thought here.
>
> > ...
> > > - if (list_empty(&domain->group_list)) {
> > > - if (list_is_singular(&iommu->domain_list)) {
> > > - if (list_empty(&iommu-
> > > >emulated_iommu_groups)) {
> > > - WARN_ON(iommu->notifier.head);
> > > -
> > > vfio_iommu_unmap_unpin_all(iommu);
> > > - } else {
> > > -
> > > vfio_iommu_unmap_unpin_reaccount(iommu);
> > > - }
> > > - }
> > > - iommu_domain_free(domain->domain);
> > > - list_del(&domain->next);
> > > - kfree(domain);
> > > - vfio_iommu_aper_expand(iommu, &iova_copy);
> >
> > Previously the aperture is adjusted when a domain is freed...
> >
> > > - vfio_update_pgsize_bitmap(iommu);
> > > - }
> > > - /*
> > > - * Removal of a group without dirty tracking may allow
> > > - * the iommu scope to be promoted.
> > > - */
> > > - if (!group->pinned_page_dirty_scope) {
> > > - iommu->num_non_pinned_groups--;
> > > - if (iommu->dirty_page_tracking)
> > > - vfio_iommu_populate_bitmap_full(iommu);
> > > - }
> > > + vfio_iommu_detach_destroy_domain(domain, iommu,
> > > group);
> > > kfree(group);
> > > break;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + vfio_iommu_aper_expand(iommu, &iova_copy);
> >
> > but now it's done for every group detach. The aperture is decided
> > by domain geometry which is not affected by attached groups.
>
> Yea, I've noticed this part. Actually Jason did this change for
> simplicity, and I think it'd be safe to do so?
Perhaps detach_destroy() can return a Boolean to indicate whether
a domain is destroyed.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
