Re: [PATCH v1 2/8] iommu: Introduce a new iommu_group_replace_domain() API

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 12:32:50AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 9:25 PM
> > 
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 06:57:35AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 3, 2023 11:03 PM
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 08:26:44AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > > > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 3:05 PM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All drivers are already required to support changing between active
> > > > > > UNMANAGED domains when using their attach_dev ops.
> > > > >
> > > > > All drivers which don't have *broken* UNMANAGED domain?
> > > >
> > > > No, all drivers.. It has always been used by VFIO.
> > >
> > > existing iommu_attach_group() doesn't support changing between
> > > two UNMANAGED domains. only from default->unmanaged or
> > > blocking->unmanaged.
> > 
> > Yes, but before we added the blocking domains VFIO was changing
> > between unmanaged domains. Blocking domains are so new that no driver
> > could have suddenly started to depend on this.
> 
> In legacy VFIO unmanaged domain was 1:1 associated with vfio
> container. I didn't say how a group can switch between two
> containers w/o going through transition to/from the default
> domain, i.e. detach from 1st container and then attach to the 2nd.

Yes, in the past we went through the default domain which is basically
another unmanaged domain type. So unmanaged -> unmanaged is OK.

> > Inside the driver, it can keep track of the domain pointer if
> > attach_dev succeeds
> 
> Are you referring to no error unwinding in __iommu_group_for_each_dev()
> so if it is failed some devices may have attach_dev succeeds then simply
> recovering group->domain in __iommu_attach_group() is insufficient?

Yes

Jason