On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 02:38:55PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 10:21:31AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 01:51:51PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 09:38:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
With a viommu object wrapping a potentially shareable S2 domain, a nested domain should be allocated by associating to a viommu instead.
For drivers without a viommu support, keep the parent domain input, which should be just viommu->hwpt->common.domain otherwise.
Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen nicolinc@nvidia.com
include/linux/iommu.h | 1 + drivers/iommu/amd/iommu.c | 1 + drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 1 + drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 1 + drivers/iommu/iommufd/hw_pagetable.c | 5 +++-- drivers/iommu/iommufd/selftest.c | 1 + 6 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h index 3a50f57b0861..9105478bdbcd 100644 --- a/include/linux/iommu.h +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h @@ -573,6 +573,7 @@ struct iommu_ops { struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc)(unsigned iommu_domain_type); struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc_user)( struct device *dev, u32 flags, struct iommu_domain *parent,
struct iommufd_viommu *viommu,This re-enforces my feeling we should have made a domain_alloc_nested()..
That could make these changes slightly cleaner. Maybe adding a small series prior to your initial nesting, and get it merged quickly?
Maybe we should put an op on the viommu_ops to allocate a nested domain?
It make some sense and resolves my worries about checking for driver ownership.
Yea, that sounds a smart move to me! Will give it a try.
Nicolin