Message ID | 20230309080910.607396-2-yi.l.liu@intel.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [01/12] iommu: Add new iommu op to create domains owned by userspace | expand |
Hi Jason, On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 08:56:06PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 12:08:59AM -0800, Yi Liu wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h > > index 3ef84ee359d2..a269bc62a31c 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/iommu.h > > +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h > > @@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ struct iommu_iotlb_gather { > > * after use. Return the data buffer if success, or ERR_PTR on > > * failure. > > * @domain_alloc: allocate iommu domain > > + * @domain_alloc_user: allocate user iommu domain > > * @probe_device: Add device to iommu driver handling > > * @release_device: Remove device from iommu driver handling > > * @probe_finalize: Do final setup work after the device is added to an IOMMU > > @@ -266,6 +267,9 @@ struct iommu_ops { > > > > /* Domain allocation and freeing by the iommu driver */ > > struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc)(unsigned iommu_domain_type); > > + struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc_user)(struct device *dev, > > + struct iommu_domain *parent, > > + const void *user_data); > > Since the kernel does the copy from user and manages the zero fill > compat maybe this user_data have a union like Robin suggested. > > But yes, this is the idea. > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> We pass in a read-only data to this ->domain_alloc_user() while it also returns NULL on failure, matching ->domain_alloc(). So, there seems to be no error feedback pathway from the driver to user space. Robin remarked in the SMMU series that an STE configuration can fail. So, a proper error feedback is required for this callback too. To return a driver/HW specific error, I think we could define a "u8 out_error" in the user_data structure. So, we probably need a non-const pass-in here. What do you think? Thanks Nic
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 05:44:04PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 08:56:06PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 12:08:59AM -0800, Yi Liu wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h > > > index 3ef84ee359d2..a269bc62a31c 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/iommu.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h > > > @@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ struct iommu_iotlb_gather { > > > * after use. Return the data buffer if success, or ERR_PTR on > > > * failure. > > > * @domain_alloc: allocate iommu domain > > > + * @domain_alloc_user: allocate user iommu domain > > > * @probe_device: Add device to iommu driver handling > > > * @release_device: Remove device from iommu driver handling > > > * @probe_finalize: Do final setup work after the device is added to an IOMMU > > > @@ -266,6 +267,9 @@ struct iommu_ops { > > > > > > /* Domain allocation and freeing by the iommu driver */ > > > struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc)(unsigned iommu_domain_type); > > > + struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc_user)(struct device *dev, > > > + struct iommu_domain *parent, > > > + const void *user_data); > > > > Since the kernel does the copy from user and manages the zero fill > > compat maybe this user_data have a union like Robin suggested. > > > > But yes, this is the idea. > > > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> > > We pass in a read-only data to this ->domain_alloc_user() while > it also returns NULL on failure, matching ->domain_alloc(). So, > there seems to be no error feedback pathway from the driver to > user space. > > Robin remarked in the SMMU series that an STE configuration can > fail. So, a proper error feedback is required for this callback > too. > > To return a driver/HW specific error, I think we could define a > "u8 out_error" in the user_data structure. So, we probably need > a non-const pass-in here. What do you think? What is wrong with err_ptr? Jason
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 08:37:14AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > @@ -266,6 +267,9 @@ struct iommu_ops { > > > > > > > > /* Domain allocation and freeing by the iommu driver */ > > > > struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc)(unsigned iommu_domain_type); > > > > + struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc_user)(struct device *dev, > > > > + struct iommu_domain *parent, > > > > + const void *user_data); > > > > > > Since the kernel does the copy from user and manages the zero fill > > > compat maybe this user_data have a union like Robin suggested. > > > > > > But yes, this is the idea. > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> > > > > We pass in a read-only data to this ->domain_alloc_user() while > > it also returns NULL on failure, matching ->domain_alloc(). So, > > there seems to be no error feedback pathway from the driver to > > user space. > > > > Robin remarked in the SMMU series that an STE configuration can > > fail. So, a proper error feedback is required for this callback > > too. > > > > To return a driver/HW specific error, I think we could define a > > "u8 out_error" in the user_data structure. So, we probably need > > a non-const pass-in here. What do you think? > > What is wrong with err_ptr? I see. That could keep the "const" then. Will try that. Thanks! Nic
diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h index 3ef84ee359d2..a269bc62a31c 100644 --- a/include/linux/iommu.h +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h @@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ struct iommu_iotlb_gather { * after use. Return the data buffer if success, or ERR_PTR on * failure. * @domain_alloc: allocate iommu domain + * @domain_alloc_user: allocate user iommu domain * @probe_device: Add device to iommu driver handling * @release_device: Remove device from iommu driver handling * @probe_finalize: Do final setup work after the device is added to an IOMMU @@ -266,6 +267,9 @@ struct iommu_ops { /* Domain allocation and freeing by the iommu driver */ struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc)(unsigned iommu_domain_type); + struct iommu_domain *(*domain_alloc_user)(struct device *dev, + struct iommu_domain *parent, + const void *user_data); struct iommu_device *(*probe_device)(struct device *dev); void (*release_device)(struct device *dev);