On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 02:10:19PM +0000, Liu, Yi L wrote: > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <j...@nvidia.com> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 7:56 PM > > > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 04:45:12PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 08:18:24 -0700 > > > Yi Liu <yi.l....@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > From: Nicolin Chen <nicol...@nvidia.com> > > > > > > > > Previously, the detach routine is only done by the destroy(). And it was > > > > called by vfio_iommufd_emulated_unbind() when the device runs close(), > > > > so > > > > all the mappings in iopt were cleaned in that setup, when the call trace > > > > reaches this detach() routine. > > > > > > > > Now, there's a need of a detach uAPI, meaning that it does not only need > > > > a new iommufd_access_detach() API, but also requires > > > > access->ops->unmap() > > > > call as a cleanup. So add one. > > > > > > > > However, leaving that unprotected can introduce some potential of a race > > > > condition during the pin_/unpin_pages() call, where access->ioas->iopt > > > > is > > > > getting referenced. So, add an ioas_lock to protect the context of iopt > > > > referencings. > > > > > > > > Also, to allow the iommufd_access_unpin_pages() callback to happen via > > > > this unmap() call, add an ioas_unpin pointer, so the unpin routine won't > > > > be affected by the "access->ioas = NULL" trick. > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.t...@intel.com> > > > > Tested-by: Terrence Xu <terrence...@intel.com> > > > > Tested-by: Yanting Jiang <yanting.ji...@intel.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicol...@nvidia.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Yi Liu <yi.l....@intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/iommu/iommufd/device.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > drivers/iommu/iommufd/iommufd_private.h | 2 + > > > > include/linux/iommufd.h | 1 + > > > > 3 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > Does this need to go in via iommufd first? There seems to be quite a > > > bit of churn in iommufd/device.c vs the vfio_mdev_ops branch (ie. it > > > doesn't apply). Thanks, > > > > I think it is best to stay with this series, Yi has to rebase it > > The rebased version is here. Shall I resend a version which is rebased on > top of vfio_mdev_ops? > > https://github.com/yiliu1765/iommufd/commit/d3d8f65c82fe2ca2a7b1a635f4b40b2a0971daa9
When you post the v10 it should be based on top of the vfio_mdev_ops and the hot reset series. Jason
