Yes, wrong.From: Ethan Zhao <haifeng.zhao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>this is wrong both in concept and function.
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2023 8:17 AM
@@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ static void __flush_svm_range_dev(struct intel_svm
*svm,
qi_flush_piotlb(sdev->iommu, sdev->did, svm->pasid, address, pages,
ih);
if (info->ats_enabled) {
+ info->iommu->flush_target_dev = info->dev;
qi_flush_dev_iotlb_pasid(sdev->iommu, sdev->sid, info-
pfsid,svm->pasid, sdev->qdep, address,
order_base_2(pages));
an iommu instance can be shared by many devices which may all have
ongoing ATS invalidation requests to handle. Using a per-iommu field
to store the flush target is limiting (and there is no lock protection at all).
if there is a real need of passing dev pointer to qi helpers, just change
the helper to accept an explicit parameter.