On 01/03/18 06:52, Lu Baolu wrote:
> Can the pasid management code be moved into a common library?
> PASID is not stick to SVA. An IOMMU model device could be designed
> to use PASID for second level translation (classical DMA translation)
> as well.
What do you mean by second level translation? Do you see a use-case with
nesting translation within the host?
I agree that PASID + classical DMA is desirable. A device driver would
allocate PASIDs and perform iommu_sva_map(domain, pasid, iova, pa, size,
prot) and iommu_sva_unmap(domain, pasid, iova, size). I'm hoping that we
can also augment the DMA API with PASIDs, and that a driver can use both
shared and private contexts simultaneously. So that it can use a few
PASIDs for management purpose, and assign the rest to userspace.
The intent is for iommu-sva.c to be this common library. Work for
"private" PASID allocation is underway, see Jordan Crouse's series
posted last week https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg635857.html
iommu mailing list