From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2023 6:22 PM
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 02:38:55AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
iommufd_device@@ -385,10 +372,8 @@ void iommufd_device_detach(struct
iommufd_device *idev)
struct iommufd_hw_pagetable *hwpt = idev->hwpt;
mutex_lock(&hwpt->ioas->mutex);
- mutex_lock(&hwpt->devices_lock);
refcount_dec(hwpt->devices_users);
- list_del(&idev->devices_item);
- if (!iommufd_hw_pagetable_has_group(hwpt, idev->group)) {
+ if (iommufd_hw_pagetable_has_device(hwpt, idev->dev)) {
if (refcount_read(hwpt->devices_users) == 1) {
iopt_table_remove_domain(&hwpt->ioas->iopt,
hwpt->domain);
@@ -397,7 +382,6 @@ void iommufd_device_detach(struct
*idev)
iommu_detach_group(hwpt->domain, idev->group);
}
emmm how do we track last device detach in a group? Here the first
device detach already leads to group detach...
Oh no. That's a bug. Thanks for catching it.
We need an additional refcount somewhere to track the number of
attached devices in the iommu_group.
Wondering if we can let iommu_attach/detach_device handle this:
that is the desired way to fully remove group awareness in iommufd.
but iirc there were some concerns on changing their semantics. But
I don't remember the detail now. Jason might know. also +Baolu/Robin.
otherwise as long as the group attach/detach continues to be used
then identifying last device in the group always needs some hack
within iommufd itself.